"As a nation we have chosen...to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. "That choice requires that we shield Westboro from tort liability for its picketing in this case."
In this, the Supreme Court AFFIRMED the lower appellate decision:
Mr. Snyder sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress and ultimately was awarded $5 million in damages. But a federal appeals court overturned the judgment on First Amendment grounds, saying the Constitution protected Westboro's speech.
Now, will the Supreme Court affirm the CAFC in the Stanford/Roche patent assignment matter, or are other things afloat there?
High court rules for military funeral protesters