←
↑
→
You can use arrow keys to navigate in the map.
Loading tree...
The First Amendment protect s statement s made by picketers from civil liability from intent ional infliction of emotional distress.
because
score: 5
Speech on matters of public concern are at the heart of the First Amendments protection.
sources:
Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. (1985)
because
score: 4
The content of the statements/signs was related to broad issues of interest to society at large.
because
score: 2
Issues highlighted in the signs (political & moral conduct of the US, the fate of our Nation, homosexuality in military, and scandals in Catholic Churches) are of public import.
because
score: 1
Speech concerning public affairs is more than self expression, it is the essence of self government.
sources:
Garrison v Louisiana (1964)
0 branch
‒
because
score: 1
The overall theme of the picketing/statements was to broader public issues. Messages were not to issues with the Snyder family.
however
score: 0
The context of the speech being connected to the funeral could make the this a matter of private rather than public concern.
but
score: 1
Even though speech was in connection with the funeral that cannot transform nature of the speech, which was reflecting idea that the church finds much to condemn in society.
0 branch
‒
2 branch
‒
0 branch
‒
because
score: 4
Picketing/speech cannot be restricted because it was upsetting. Government cannot prohibit expression because society finds it offensive or disagreeable.
sources:
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
because
score: 1
The protest was not unruly. There was no shouting, no profanity, and no violence
because
score: 1
The distress in this case came from the content and viewpoint rather than any interference with the funeral.
because
score: 1
We must tolerate insulting speech in order to provide adequate breathing space to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.
sources:
Boos v Barry (1988)
2 branch
‒
because
score: 1
Free Speech Clause can serve as a defense
sources:
Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell (1988)
because
score: 1
Picketing was done at a public place and such places occupy a "special position in terms of First Amendment protection".
sources:
United States v. Grace (1983)
however
score: 0
All speech is not equally protected and permissible in all places at all times
but
score: 1
Westboro had a right to be where they were picketing and complied with police guidelines.
0 branch
‒
0 branch
‒
3 branch
‒
×
The argument is too complex. You can switch to list view.
last update:
richajor
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
richajor
