Snyder V. Snyder's Case Of The Freedom Of Speech

From the early age in history, democracy has been what we desire. Therefore, the United States constitution provides protection to all the common rights that a citizen deserves. As in the 1st amendment, the protected freedom of speech is literally limitless in expressing ones’ opinion without fearing consequences. However, the case of Snyder is one of many cases that prove cracks in that protected right. The freedom of speech should be limited to a point where ones’ sayings are not allowed to hurt another in a very hard least moment like in funeral. Snyder V Phelps is the case of a father suing the church for emotionally interfering his son’s funeral by a protest of homosexuality. The father (Snyder) of the fallen solider was suing for intentional infliction of emotional distress also for invasion of privacy. The church had found out when and where the

Snyder took it to the civil court and the civil court jury granted him the verdict to his favor. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the jury verdict since the case was a 1st amendment issue which civil court could not give a verdict. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari which the verdict did not go for the Snyder’s family.
So why didn’t the Snyder family get the verdict to their favor by the Supreme Court but the civil court jury verdict went to their favor? As stated in the first paragraph the issue was the case was involved with the first amendment which only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction for such a case. The Supreme Court had review the case and looked at the issue brought into the case. The main issue of the case was “individual’s interest in suing to recover for the disruption of a family member’s funeral outweigh the disrupter’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech?.” So no, the individual interest of recovery cannot outweigh the First Amendment right to freedom of speech since the Free Speech clause can protect the