On March 8, 2010, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Snyder v. Phelps. The case involves claims of: 1) intentional infliction of emotional distress; 2) invasion of privacy; and 3) civil conspiracy. The plaintiff’s son was killed in Iraq, and the defendant’s church picketed the funeral—carrying signs such as “God hates you,” and “Thank God for dead soldiers.”
A jury awarded $10.9 million to plaintiff in compensatory and punitive damages. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the defendant’s speech was protected under the Constitution.
The questions presented to the Supreme Court are:
- 1. Does Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell apply to a private person versus another private person concerning a private matter?
- 2. Does the First Amendment’s freedom of speech tenet trump the First Amendment’s freedom of religion and peaceful assembly?
- 3. Does an individual attending a family member’s funeral constitute a captive audience who is entitled to state protection from unwanted communication?
Jeffrey Shulman, of Georgetown University Law Center, has been actively involved in this case and has contributed his insightful scholarship for publication with Penn State Law Review.
Penn State Law Review Publications
Jeffrey Shulman, When is Religious Speech Outrageous?: Snyder v. Phelps and the Limits of Religious Advocacy, 114 Penn St. L. Rev. Penn Statim 13 (2010).
Jeffrey Shulman, The Outrageous God: Emotional Distress, Tort Liability, and the Limits of Religious Advocacy, 113 Penn St. L. Rev. 381 (2008).
Previous Opinions
Snyder v. Phelps, 580 F.3d 206 (4th. Cir. 2008) (reversing jury award for plaintiff).
Snyder v. Phelps, 533 F.Supp.2d 567 (D.Md. 2008) (upholding jury verdict awarding $10.9 million to plaintiff).
Call for Papers
Penn State Law Review invites submissions on this case and related subjects for publication in Penn Statim. Submissions should be of essay length and ideally should not exceed 5,000 words. Please email submissions to editor@pennstatelawreview.org.