Supreme Court Set to Hear Arguments on Protests at Military Funerals

Margie Phelps, left, grandson Isaiah Phelps-Roper, 17, right, both members of Westboro Baptist...

Margie Phelps, left, grandson Isaiah Phelps-Roper, 17, right, both members of Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, are filmed as they protest outside Holy Ghost Church during the funeral service for Marine Lance Cpl. Philip Martini, in this 2006 file photo in South Holland, Illinois.

(Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Free Speech: How Far is Too Far?

According to Jeffrey Rosen, a professor at the George Washington University Law school, "This case might not have huge constitutional dimensions but it does raise this very important question, namely: how much protection do relatively private figures have against hurtful, outrageous, insulting, emotionally-aggravating speech."

Margie J. Phelps, who is Pastor Phelps' daughter and serves as the counsel of record for Westboro Baptist Church, said the case provides an "excellent platform for the words that we've faithfully delivered to the nation for twenty years." She says that the church has attended over 600 funerals of soldiers because members of the congregation are trying to get out the message that if the military stops accepting homosexuals, soldiers will stop dying.

"The issue about these dead soldiers is an issue of acute public importance," Margie Phelps said.

Related

Marine Funeral Hecklers Call It Free Speech

Military Funeral Case Sparks Outrage

Funeral Protests Are Criminal, Father of Slain Marine Says

Craig Trebilcock, a lawyer for Albert Snyder, detailed how his client was devastated that the members of the church invaded his privacy.

"Mr. Snyder felt that he had one opportunity, a few hours, to say goodbye to his son and they were torn away from him. He can't think about his son's passing and can't get closure because every time he thinks of his son's death and his funeral, he sees the Phelps family carrying a sign saying "you're in hell," said Trebilcock.

The attorney hopes the court will look at the case as a balancing test and rule in favor of Snyder's claim to the right to peaceful and religious assembly.

"We don't believe there is an unlimited First Amendment right to engage in outrageous conduct intended to inflict harm on a private person," said Trebilcock.

"The core of this case" said Professor Rosen, "is whether or not this speech was directed at particular individuals, whether they were captive in a particular enclosed setting and also whether or not the speech was about matters of opinion or of falsifiable facts, and those are the kind of questions the case might turn on."