1 / 13

Snyder vs. Phelps

Snyder vs. Phelps. No. 09–751. Argued October 6, 2010—Decided March 2, 2011 Aggressive Communication Hate Speech. Type of Speech used: Aggressive Communication.

wesley
Télécharger la présentation

Snyder vs. Phelps

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Snyder vs. Phelps No. 09–751. Argued October 6, 2010—Decided March 2, 2011 Aggressive Communication Hate Speech

  2. 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.

  3. 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”.

  4. Geographic Location • Westminster, Maryland

  5. C I R C U M S T A N C E SPeople involved SNYDER PHELPS Westboro Baptist Church Anti homo-sexuality Protest at Military funerals Baptist • U.S. Marine Lance Corporal • Served in Iraq • Lost his life while serving his country • Heterosexual • Catholic

  6. S N Y D E R T H E I R C AU S E S • Emotional distress • Defamation • Intrusion upon seclusion • Publicity given to private life • Civil conspiracy P H E L P 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

  7. 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.

  8. 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 Amendment Congress 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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?

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. Works cited: 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/

More Related