Demonstrations In New York Make Several Things Clear

[mahatmakanejeeves]

33. Take it up with the ACLU.

I can do without your condescending "dear," thank you.

And good morning.

Stating the demonstrators have a right to free speech is saying the people demonstrating have a right to openly advocate torture, rape, and murder of Jews. Once one has said this, pressing on to say 'I don't support the torture, rape, and murder of Jews, but they've got the right to' has the ring of a cracked bell.

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie

Decided June 14, 1977
Full case name: National Socialist Party of America et al. v. Village of Skokie
Holding:
If a state seeks to impose an injunction in the face of a substantial claim of First Amendment rights, it must provide strict procedural safeguards, including immediate appellate review. Absent such immediate review, the appellate court must grant a stay of any lower court order restricting the exercise of speech and assembly rights.
Court membership:
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, 432 U.S. 43 (1977), arising out of what is sometimes referred to as the Skokie Affair, was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court dealing with freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. This case is considered a "classic" free speech case in constitutional law classes. Related court decisions are captioned Skokie v. NSPA, Collin v. Smith, and Smith v. Collin. The Supreme Court ruled 5–4, per curiam. The Supreme Court's 1977 ruling granted certiorari and reversed and remanded the Illinois Supreme Court's denial to lift the lower court's injunction on the NSPA's march. In other words: the courts decided a person's assertion that speech is being restrained must be reviewed immediately by the judiciary. By requiring the state court to consider the neo-Nazis' appeal without delay, the U.S. Supreme Court decision opened the door to allowing the National Socialist Party of America to march.

{snip}

Preceding lower court cases

The case began in the local Cook County court, when the Village government successfully sued, under the caption Village of Skokie v. NSPA, for an injunction to bar the demonstration. On April 28, 1977, village attorney Schwartz filed suit in the Circuit Court of Cook County for an emergency injunction against the march to be held on May 1, 1977. The injunction was granted, prohibiting marchers at the proposed Skokie rally from wearing Nazi uniforms or displaying swastikas. On behalf of the NSPA, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenged the injunction. The ACLU assigned civil rights attorneys David Goldberger and Burton Joseph to Collin's cases. The ACLU argued that the injunction violated the First Amendment rights of the marchers to express themselves. The ACLU challenge was unsuccessful at the lower court level.

The ACLU appealed on behalf of NSPA, but both the Illinois Appellate Court and the Illinois Supreme Court refused to expedite the case or to stay the injunction. The ACLU then appealed that refusal to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Supreme Court ruling and subsequent cases

On June 14, 1977, the Supreme Court ordered Illinois to hold a hearing on their ruling against the National Socialist Party of America, emphasizing that "if a State seeks to impose a restraint on First Amendment rights, it must provide strict procedural safeguards, including immediate appellate review. ... Absent such review, the State must instead allow a stay. The order of the Illinois Supreme Court constituted a denial of that right." On remand, the Illinois Supreme Court sent the case back to the Illinois Appellate Court. The Appellate Court ruled per curiam on July 11, 1977 that the swastika was not protected by the First Amendment. In other words, the NSPA could march, but they could not display the swastika during their march.

In its full review of the case, the Illinois Supreme Court focused on the First Amendment implications of the display of the swastika. Skokie attorneys argued that for Holocaust survivors, seeing the swastika was like being physically attacked. The state supreme court rejected that argument, ruling that display of the swastika is a symbolic form of free speech entitled to First Amendment protections and determined that the swastika itself did not constitute "fighting words". Its ruling allowed the National Socialist Party of America to march.

In parallel litigation in the federal courts, under the caption Collin v. Smith, the village's ordinance was declared unconstitutional, first by the district court and then by divided vote of the Seventh Circuit court of appeals. Over a published dissent by Justice Blackmun (joined by Justice White) giving a detailed history of the case and an overview of the issues involved, the U.S. Supreme Court denied further review.

{snip}

Snyder v. Phelps

Argued: October 6, 2010
Decided: March 2, 2011
Full case name: Albert Snyder v. Fred W. Phelps Sr.; Westboro Baptist Church, Incorporated; Rebekah A. Phelps-Davis; Shirley L. Phelps-Roper
Holding:
Speech on a matter of public concern, in a public place, cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress. Fourth Circuit affirmed, trial court reversed and remanded.
Court membership:
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority: Roberts, joined by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
Concurrence: Breyer
Dissent: Alito

Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous.

{snip}

Supreme Court


Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion

Several news and civil rights organizations filed amicus briefs in support of Phelps, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and twenty-one other media organizations, including National Public Radio, Bloomberg L.P., the Associated Press, the Newspaper Association of America, and others.

Other briefs were filed in favor of Snyder, including one by Senate Majority and Minority Leaders Mitch McConnell and Harry Reid, and forty other members of the United States Senate. A number of veterans groups, including the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion, the John Marshall Veterans Legal Support Center and Clinic, and another by Kansas which was joined by the District of Columbia and every other State except Delaware and Maine.

Arguments were heard on October 6, where the WBC was represented by Phelps' daughter, Margie Phelps.

{snip}