We all know Fred Phelps and his merry band. They are disgusting, despicable, depraved. And constitutionally protected:
The First Amendment protects hateful protests at military funerals, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday in an 8-1 decision.
Speech is powerful,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and — as it did here — inflict great pain.”
But under the First Amendment, he went on, “we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker.” Instead, the national commitment to free speech, he said, requires protection of “even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.”
At first glance, it looks like a well-reasoned opinion. It recognizes the extra care needed for the protection of speech about matters of public concern yet leaves open time, place and manner restrictions (Roberts specifically mentions buffer zones for things like funerals). Note the observation that our commitment to free speech requires protection of "even hurtful speech." Buf if there were no such thing as hurtful speech, would we even need the First Amendment?
