In an action that has outraged many citizens, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has ordered the family of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder to pay the legal costs of the extremist Westboro Baptist Church, which picketed Snyder’s funeral and celebrated his death.
In 2006, the Fourth Circuit reversed judgments against Westboro, a decision that I agree with on first amendment grounds. The Supreme Court has taken up the case.
The Church has announced that it will use the money to fund more protests at the funerals of fallen soldiers and Marines where Church members wave signs reading “You’re going to hell,” “God hates you” and “Thank God for dead soldiers.”
The Fourth Circuit ordered the family to pay more than $16,000 in costs requested by Westboro for copies of motions, briefs and appendices, according to court documents.
The Church members view the entire matter in more apocalyptic rather than procedural terms. Phelps, one of its leaders and lawyers, stated:
“When the Supreme Court unanimously upholds the 4th Circuit, it’s going to put this country in a rage, and we will be expelled,” she said. “But whenever it was time for an epic event in the Bible, the thing that happened right before is the prophets were removed from the land, and that’s what’s going to happen to us. … We’re going to sprint to the end of this race.”
Rule 39 states:
Rule 39. Costs
(a) Against Whom Assessed. The following rules apply unless the law provides or the court orders otherwise:
(1)if an appeal is dismissed, costs are taxed against the appellant, unless the parties agree
otherwise;
(2)if a judgment is affirmed, costs are taxed against the appellant;
(3)if a judgment is reversed, costs are taxed against the appellee;
(4)if a judgment is affirmed in part, reversed in part, modified, or vacated, costs are taxed only as the court orders.
I disagree with the assignment of such costs. For years, some jurists and politicians have been moving toward an “English rule” where losers pay costs in litigation. It is a rule that has a decidedly negative impact on public interest and consumer lawsuits. This is not as extreme as the English rule but it creates a chilling effect for any family that wants to be heard in such a case. It is particularly troubling when the family prevailed at trial in a clearly non-frivolous case. While I believe the Church has free speech rights in conducting these protests, I do not see the wisdom in the awarding of costs as a general rule in such cases against a private — as opposed to a governmental — litigant.
For the full story, click here.
“Where is Mr. Snyders right to free speech? To free expression? How about his freedom to practice his religion?
You cannot ensure 1 parties rights by squelching the same right of someone else yet no one seems to be recognizing that that is exactly what the ‘church’ of nasty people is doing.”
Since the Phelps’s are banned from approaching the funeral, and are compelled to hold their protests 300 feet away your argument claiming they are squelching the rights of others would fall flat.
It is unfortunate that the Phelp’s choose the venue they choose to spread their religious opinions but unless we would like to turn America into an Orwellian police state that stifles freedom of belief and expression then the Phelps’s are merely a good example of how much we as American’s value our freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
“Personal matter? Saying that they have the ear of the Almighty and that He tells them exactly and directly what his wishes truly entail is a personal matter incapable of verification? Even in my upbringing, one could tolerate a person who talked to his god, but if god talked back in a literal sense, we knew the poor deluded soul had jumped squarely into the deep end. Disproving a fairly tale is the easy part.”
You mean a fairy tale? Well sir you are welcome to try and overturn a few centuries of religious freedom of expression if you think you are able to but I can tell you now you would lose.
Your opinions whether accurate or not won’t help you overturn the 1st Amendment.
The kids are all right
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEiwBCpiA0E&hl=en_US&fs=1&]
“Therefore in order to leverage that ruling you’d have to first prove that the Phelps’ teachings and doctrines are false.And since religion is pretty much a personal matter I don’t see how you would ever successfully make such an argument.”
*************
Personal matter? Saying that they have the ear of the Almighty and that He tells them exactly and directly what his wishes truly entail is a personal matter incapable of verification? Even in my upbringing, one could tolerate a person who talked to his god, but if god talked back in a literal sense, we knew the poor deluded soul had jumped squarely into the deep end. Disproving a fairly tale is the easy part.
Oh please ignore my previous post, I just read: http://kimbaland.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/westboro-assholes-and-free-speech/
So arrest them for hustling already……
‘The Westboro church has gained infamy by organizing protests at the funerals of fallen soldiers, contending that God delights in such tragic losses because of excessive toleration of homosexuality in the United States. (One of thier tamer slogans “Thank God for Dead Soldiers.”)’
….’Albert Snyder filed a federal lawsuit against the church, and a jury awarded him nearly $11 million dollars for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. But the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the verdict on the grounds that the church’s First Amendment right to free expression must be protected. ‘
Mr. Snyder filed suit and won…he never contended that they had no right to thier opinion, but that the manner and time of thier demon-stration inflicted distress. When GW came to town and the WTO came to Miami, they set up ‘demonstration zones’ that were VERY FAR AWAY from the faces of those that did not care to hear their message.[talk about squelching….] Why is this different?
Where is Mr. Snyders right to free speech? To free expression? How about his freedom to practice his religion?
You cannot ensure 1 parties rights by squelching the same right of someone else yet no one seems to be recognizing that that is exactly what the ‘church’ of nasty people is doing.
Yes Leo, Washburn is a highly ranked regionally accredited school. That’s why I just said Washburn. I figured you knew. Its good that you researched it though as it just reiterates my point that these people are not unintelligent. Which makes it all the more disturbing.
To Bryon, I don’t know on what grounds you’d challenge their mental health but given these are some pretty skilled, savvy lawyers I’d think they’d likely turn any such accusations back on you in court. They’re non violent and they obey the laws, hold down jobs and raise what appears to be reasonably healthy happy families. True they use inflammatory language but if we leveraged our mental health system against anyone using inflammatory language we’d be interviewing half the country.
The first Amendment doesn’t say you have to like the speech, or that the speech can’t be inflammatory. Free speech is free speech.
To Raflaw.
“While I understand that the church members have a First Amendment right to free speech, when does that speech become the equivalent to yelling “Fire” in the crowded theater?”
Raflaw the ruling you’re referring to requires that you “falsely” yell fire in a crowded theater. Therefore in order to leverage that ruling you’d have to first prove that the Phelps’ teachings and doctrines are false. And since religion is pretty much a personal matter I don’t see how you would ever successfully make such an argument.
Goodnight to all.
“Fred W. Phelps, Sr. retired from practicing law in 1987. Eleven of his thirteen children hold law degrees, four of whom maintain the tradition of excellent service begun by their father at Phelps-Chartered almost forty years ago.”
http://www.phelpschartered.com/FirmHistory.htm
“Shirley is currently licensed to practice before all Kansas Courts, State and Federal, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court.”
More @:
http://www.phelpschartered.com/ShirleyLPhelpsRoper.htm
In some ways this sound like the abortion debates. Truly equal rights are hard to decide. Solomon is with us no more and the courts must HATE these types of cases.
Byron’s solution “Just beat them to within an inch of their lives once or twice and they will stop.” is apparently what they are expecting. “the thing that happened right before (an epic biblical event) is the prophets were removed from the land, and that’s what’s going to happen to us.”
Much like Jim Jones and the the Branch Davidians, they NEED persecution.
Let’s not give it to them, and let’s not let them persecute any more military families. Maybe some psychological exam(s) are in order? Maybe the use of funds awarded can be circumscribed by the courts? Certainly protection of military families’ seclusion must be of at least as much importance as the group’s right to protest.
I cannot post the link within previous post, therefore:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washburn_University_School_of_Law
_________________________________
Quote:
The Washburn University School of Law, commonly referred to as Washburn Law, is a public law school located on the main campus of Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas. Washburn Law was founded in 1903. The school has 79 faculty members and 445 students. The school has been accredited by the American Bar Association since 1923 and has been a member of the Association of American Law Schools since 1905.[6] The 2010 edition of US News and World Report’s Best Law Schools ranked Washburn in the third tier for ABA accredited schools.[7] In the 2010 edition of the National Jurist Best value law schools Washburn Law was ranked 31st overall.[8] Washburn Law was also listed under the outstanding category in the 2010 edition of the Princeton Review’s best law schools release.[9] The SSRN ranks Washburn Law’s tax program as #19 overall and its tax faculty as #9 overall.[10] Washburn Law was also ranked #75 overall according to the 2010 ranking by the AALS.[11] The IRLG ranked Washburn Law #58 overall in its’ 2009 ranking of law schools.[12] Law & Politics 2010 ranking of law schools ranked Washburn law #105 overall among ABA approved law schools.[13]
The Washburn Law Library is the largest law library in the state of Kansas with over 385,000 volumes.[14] It has been ranked as one of the top 20 law school libraries in the country.[15] The law library maintains Washlaw, one of the nation’s leading Internet legal research portals.[16]
End Quote
___________________________________
Also,
“Washburn School of Law had the highest pass rate of the Kansas State Bar Exam of any law school in the state of Kansas.”
“I watched the full 58+ minutes of the video. I would like to know if those attorneys went to fully accredited law schools.”
Well Leo all I can say is if you had watched the full 58+ minutes of the video then you would have seen the segment where Louis follows one of the daughters, Meghan Phelps on campus where she attended Law School. The same school many of the Phelps including Fred Phelps attended. The school was Washburn.
Benders Flats,
I watched the full 58+ minutes of the video. I would like to know if those attorneys went to fully accredited law schools.
In some ways, I see those young girls (especially) as nuns and young boys as priests who took celibacy vows but who choose to live openly in society instead of secreted in a secluded chapel or monastery.
“I found the documentary fascinating and thought others would particularly considering the chosen profession of the Phelps is Law and this is a legal blog.”
*****************
Stories of mad lawyers doesn’t interest me. Like Phelps, Robespierre ran his own “Reign of Terror” and also wore the coif. How’d he end up?
“We always expect these sort of people to be different than us somehow so its surprising when we find they are so much like us, in fact they are us. Thus the importance of the contrast.”
*****************
Why should we be surprised that these vampires of emotion don’t retreat to their coffins during their “downtime?” Stealing directly from Hannah Arendt: the insidiousness of evil is in its banality.
Thank you Leo, I shall look for that. But as for these comments made to me misrepresenting my words or name calling is not what I would consider welcoming them. I simply pointed out the nature of these peoples daily lives as we see in a BBC documentary that shows their normal lives in contrast to their dark, church lives. Much like PBS often shows views of Nazi’s in every day social settings and how that human side co-existed with in their case a much more dark and sinister nature.
Movies often do this to show us how quickly evil can overtake us even in the most seemingly benign settings. “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas” is an excellent recent example of this method of presentation. “Schindler’s List” is another obvious example. We always expect these sort of people to be different than us somehow so its surprising when we find they are so much like us, in fact they are us. Thus the importance of the contrast.
I found the documentary fascinating and thought others would particularly considering the chosen profession of the Phelps is Law and this is a legal blog.
Mespo,
Your comments sound reasonable to me. Perhaps this case will allow others to think about the need to secure such permits and/or legislators to “cordon off” buffer zones for such activities as funerals.
Benders Flats,
Okay. Your views are welcome, to which Mespo would be one of the first to acknowledge.