Snyder vs. PhelpsNo. 09–751. Argued October 6, 2010—Decided March 2, 2011

Aggressive Communication Hate Speech

Type of Speech used: Aggressive Communication• Aggressive communication is defined as “the ability

to force one’s will (i.e., wants, needs, or desires) on another person through the use of verbal or nonverbal acts.”

• Aggressive communication is carried out with the intention or the perceived intention of inflicting physical or psychological pain, injury, or suffering.

Examples of Aggressive Communication that WBC used• intention of inflicting physical or psychological

pain − Expert witnesses said “This caused Snyder emotional

anguish and had exacerbated pre-existing health conditions.”

− Westboro picketers signs that stated:• “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”• “God Hates Fags” • “You’re Going to Hell”.

Geographic Location• Westminster, Maryland

C I R C U M S T A N C E SPeople involved

SNYDER• U.S. Marine Lance

Corporal• Served in Iraq• Lost his life while serving

his country• Heterosexual• Catholic

PHELPS• Westboro Baptist Church• Anti homo-sexuality• Protest at Military

funerals• Baptist

S N Y D E R P H E L P S• Emotional distress• Defamation• Intrusion upon seclusion• Publicity given to private life• Civil conspiracy

T H E I R C AU S E S

• In protest of America's increasing tolerance of homosexuality

• Complied with local ordinances & obeyed police instructions

• Could be neither seen nor heard• Rhetorical hyperbole & figurative

expression, rather than fact, therefore a form of protected speech

The Court Case• Original suite

− Case first presented at the US District Court in Maryland. On October 31st 2007 the court issued verdict in favor of Plaintiff (Snyder Family) and awarded $5 million in damages.

• Appeal− September 24th 2009 the WBC appealed the previous verdict at the Fourth

Circuit Court of Appeals. The court ruled that the WBC’s statements were on matters of public concern, were not provably false, and were expressed solely through hyperbolic rhetoric and as such were a form of protected speech under the 1st amendment.

− Reversed previous jury verdict and the lower courts $5 million judgment.

Results• Supreme Court

− Supreme Court decided the case hinged on one issue "Whether the First Amendment prohibits holding Westboro liable for its speech in this case turns largely on whether that speech is of public or private concern."

− Court determined the words on Westboro’s signs dealt with “matters of public import.”

− March 2nd 2011, 8-1 decision in favor of Westboro Baptist Church citing 1st Amendment protection.

1st AmendmentCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Recommendations for Remedy• In the case of Snyder v. Phelps the case being in favor of the Snyder family should

remain the same. • The WBC church should have apologized for causing the issues that it did by

picketing the funeral of a solider who killed in the line of duty while fighting for American’s rights.

• The WBC could have picketed anywhere but choosing to picket at the funeral of the deceased solider was a low point for anyone.

• Offering an apology to the family for the WBC actions would have been the human thing to do.

Questions for the Audience• Were the actions of WBC appropriate by picketing the

funeral of deceased solider Snyder?• If Matthew Snyder was your loved one would you have

sued the WBC for picketing the funeral?• Should WBC have been ordered to pay the damages that

were awarded to the Snyder family?

What we learned as a group 

• About the hate speech we researched− Hate should not be taught to be acceptable− Hate will not change the circumstances but rather cause more

problems− There is a right and wrong way to display feelings towards one

another

What we learned as a group• About the group project

− Communication is essential in working efficiently− It is important to pick areas that play towards the individuals

strengths while allowing them to grow at the same time− It helps to set deadlines and stick to them so everyone knows what

to expect− Giving constructive feedback helps the process move along and be

successful

Abigail, R. A., & Cahn, D. D. (2008). Managing Conflict Through Communication. Pearson.Cornell University of Law. (n.d.). Retrieved November 18th , 2013, from Legal Information Institute : http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-751.ZS.html

California Law Review. Retrieved November 21, 2013, from: http://www.californialawreview.org/articles/regulating-offensiveness-snyder-v-phelps-emotion-and-the-first-amendment

Gregory, S. (2001, March 3rd). Time Magazine . Retrieved November 18th, 2013, from http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2056613,00.html

United States Courts . (n.d.). Retrieved November 18th , 2013, from http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-involved/constitution-activities/first-amendment/protests-flash-mobs/facts-case-summary.aspx

Week 1: FOUNDATIONS FOR THEORY AND PRACTICE ,The Power of Language, Labels, and Naming Pg 45, 48-50) (orbe_and_harris_ch_3.pdf)

Week 2: THE ENGAGED SOCIOLOGIST, Learning How to Act in Society Pg 64-65 (korgen_and_white_5.pdf)The Languages of Conflict Management Pg 65 (borisoff_and_victor_57-73.pdf)

The Yale Law Journal. Retrieved November 20, 2013, from: http://yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal-pocket-part/supreme-court/snyder-v.-phelps,-the-supreme-court%27s-speech%11tort-jurisprudence,-and-normative-considerations/

Works cited: