Snyder v. Phelps (09-751)

argument 09-751

Snyder v. Phelps

Supreme Court of the United States 1h 0m 7 speakers 8 chapters transcribed 4 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the central legal issue in Snyder v. Phelps regarding funeral protests?

John G. Roberts 0:03

We'll hear argument first today in case zero nine seven fifty one, Snyder versus Sel uh Phelps. Mr. Summers?

Paul D. Summers 0:12

Mr. Chief Justice, may it please the court. We're talking about a funeral. If context is ever going to matter, it has to matter in the context of a funeral. Mr Snyder simply wanted to bury his son in a private, dignified manner. When a respondent's behaviour made that impossible, Mr. Schneider was entitled to turn to the tort law of the state of Maryland.

Antonin Scalia 0:37

Are we just talking about a funeral? That's that's one of the problems I have with the case. There there was also this video that uh uh that your client uh watched, right, later, after the funeral.

Paul D. Summers 0:49

There was a flyer that was sent out prior to the funeral. We have the funeral and we have what they described as the epic which was put on the internet afterwards, which Well what does that have to do with a funeral? As the district court explained and and the circuit court um followed their logic and I think the facts at trial um confirmed this, that the epic was essentially a recap of the funeral protest itself. That's

Antonin Scalia 1:14

fine, but it's it it does not intrude upon the funeral. I mean y y you know, you you you you either have two separate uh causes of action. One is the intrusion upon the funeral and the other is the the uh the harm caused by uh viewing this uh uh this posting on the internet, but uh I don't see how how they both relate to intrusion upon the funeral.

Paul D. Summers 1:36

Well

Antonin Scalia 1:36

the and they were just submitted to the jury as as one big lump, right?

Paul D. Summers 1:41

Well we had the flyer that was submitted that was s sent out before um the funeral, we have the facts of the funeral and yes the epic did. Of course we focused on the personal targeted comments in the epic. Um When we presented our evidence, but yes it was supposed

Antonin Scalia 1:56

there hadn't been a funeral uh uh protest, just the epoch would would would that have uh uh supported the cause of action you you assert here?

Paul D. Summers 2:04

I think that's a closer call, but when we have the person, Yes or no? I would say yes, because we have the personal targeted um epitets directed at the Snyder family.

Antonin Scalia 2:16

Even though it's it's uh he don't have to watch him. They're just posted on the on the internet. That's correct, Justice Court. It's his choice to watch them. But if he chooses to watch them, he has a cause of action because it uh causes him

Paul D. Summers 2:28

distress. Well the he has a cause of action. That doesn't mean he is going to win. We still have the the pleading standards, the summary judgment standards, and the motion to dismiss

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 2:37

the. Well why does he have uh a claim as I understand it. After this case arose. Maryland passed the statute. Putting time, place and manner restrictions. I read that statute and it seems to me That there was nothing unlawful. Nothing out of compliance with that statute that was done here. And there was a considerable distance, there was no importuning anyone going. to the funeral. Stop before the funeral. The service began. Am I right that the in under the current statute This conduct was not unlawful.

Paul D. Summers 3:19

The Justice Ginsburg the statue wasn't in place at the time, but it's a complicated answer to the question because they were positioned about thirty feet from the main vehicle entrance to the church and they rerouted the funeral procession so they were two to three hundred feet away.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 3:34

Didn't they didn't they stand where the police told them to?

Paul D. Summers 3:37

Well at least. They told the police where they wanted to stand and the police said okay. So the police didn't say please stand here. They said in fact they sent out a flyer.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 3:47

knowledge of the police and with the permission of the police.

Paul D. Summers 3:50

It is true they did not violate any criminal statutes.

Samuel A. Alito 3:53

Is there anything to suggest that the Maryland legislature in enacting that statute intended to occupy the field of regulations of events that occur at funerals?

Paul D. Summers 4:03

I believe that the leg Maryland legislature um made it clear that they didn't want people to protest funerals in general. Um but they didn't

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 4:13

prohibit it.

Paul D. Summers 4:14

They didn't pro prohibit it under certain circumstances and Which

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 4:18

this case which the facts here meet.