Snyder v. Phelps
The First Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, and prohibits the making of any law " impeding the free exercise of religion," infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances." Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the Congress. However, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the First Amendment to each state, including any local government (Farber, 2002, intro). The First Amendment has been used over and over again to test the limits of free speech or exercising opinions that may be contrary to current public views, or even offensive to some.
This was the case in a 2011 Supreme Court Decision, Snyder v. Phelps (562 U.S. Supreme Court), in which the Court found that speech on public sidewalks about a contentious or public issue is covered under the First Amendment right to free and uncontested speech, even if that speech is distasteful, or as the Court noted, "outrageous."
The issue surrounded the claim of intentional emotional distress. On March 10, 2006, members...
Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, killed in a non-combat accident in Iraq. The WBC members had picketed other funerals, and were trying to use this forum to express their indignation about America's increasing tolerance of homosexuality and liberal views. Picketers held posters that said such things as "Fag Troops," "God Hates You," "Semper Fi Fags," and "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," among others (Bates, 2011).
Albert Snyder, Matthew's Father, was so distressed by this behavior that he sued Fred Phelps, Pastor of the WBC, and two of his daughters for defamation, intrusion, intentional infliction of emotional distress and civil conspiracy. The claim of defamation was dismissed because it focused on comments on the WBC website, which the courts held that the contentions were opinion meant for a limited audience. The actual facts of the case were not disputed at trial, but the WBC countered that they had complied with all local ordinances and police instructions. Although WBC sought a mistrial, in October 2007, the jury found for Snyder with a total award of $10.9 million, later reduced to $5 million by a Judge based on the resources of the WBC. The Fourth…
Federal Courts On Linda Greenhouse's Op-Ed: "Lessons Maybe Learned" Linda Greenhouse in her New York Times article titled Lessons Maybe Learned reminds us that the federal courts still exist, despite the weakening of Constitutional protections for privacy, free speech, and due process, and against cruel and unusual punishment since 9/11. She opens her opinion piece by relating her sentiment of the almost invisibility of judicial branch in the post-9/11 America. Of course
Federal Judiciary On Wednesday morning, right before the Supreme Court justices were about to begin their day, Justice Kennedy put a 24-hour hold on a Ninth Circuit Court mandate nullifying same sex marriage bans in the states of Nevada and Idaho (Denniston, 2014). The temporary stay on the Ninth Circuit's ruling is to allow ban opponents to present their side of the issue. This ruling surprised everyone because last year the
S.B. 1070, ACA, AND FEDERAL PREEMPTION 1070, the ACA, and Federal Preemption S.B. 1070, the ACA, and Federal Preemption Tenth Amendment The Tenth Amendment was intended to limit the scope and power of the federal government, thereby preserving some measure of state autonomy (Lash, 2006). The Tenth Amendment accomplishes this by stating explicitly that the federal government can only exercise those powers enumerated within the U.S. Constitution. All other powers are left to the
Federal Courts There are three branches of the federal government: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The federal courts were established by Congress, which is given the power to establish them in the Constitution. The Constitution also empowers the Congress to establish the jurisdiction of the federal courts, determine the number of judges needed in the federal court system, to confirm Executive appointments of judges, and to manage the judiciary's
Week 5 2. First, the Parkers were contractually obligated to pay the late fees because the fees were not exorbitant and were part of the parties' lease contract. However, unless the lease contract specifically says that the late fees could be charged as additional rent, then the landlord could not consider the late fees additional rent. If the late fees cannot be considered additional rent, then the Parker's failure to pay
Determination of Federal Court of Appeal in the case of Canterbury vs. Spence Canterbury filed a lawsuit against Spence in the United States. In this lawsuit, Canterbury alleged that Dr. Spence had shown negligence when performing laminectomy on Canterbury and failed to inform him fully about the risks involved in the surgery. In addition, the lawsuit argued that Dr. Spence had negligent as he allowed Canterbury to remain unattended to following