Once again; the title of the article has little to do with what she said...
Ah, the keen legal mind of Sarah Palin.
Too bad Roberts, Scalia and Thomas disagree.
As do I. What they’re doing is protected speech, as disgusting as it is.
"There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting words" those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." – Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942
Spewing hatred towards the deceased at a funeral in front of his family qualifies as "Fighting Words" if anything does.
Maybe it will take an actual physical fight for the Supreme Court to realize this.
I somewhat agree with the decision. I abhor the WBC idiots. But, if they had cut their rights, who’s to say the left would at some point use the restriction of the 1st amendment against the tea partiers?
There are other ways to deal with WBC.
Justice Samual Alito was the only justice to submit a dissenting opinion, saying that the First Amendment does not protect those who launch “vicious verbal attacks that make no contribution to public debate” during “a time of intense emotional sensitivity.”
*******************************************************
Unfortunately this argument would outlaw The Daily Kos.
Although that might sound like a good idea it is one that, in the wrong hands, could do the same to FR. The 1st Amendment isn’t perfect but it is better than any alternative I can think of. It is bitter sweet for sure and sometimes you just have accept the fact that it allows people to legally be jerks. That’s the price we pay for what passes these days as freedom of speech.
She did not say their speech should not be protected. The headline is a lie.
I hear you. Attended a funeral at the family’s request where these idiots showed up. 220 American flag holding pissed bikers and veterans. The idiots (3 women and a boy) did not hang around very long. The family never saw or heard the idiots..
LYING title -what she actually said.
After dailycaller’s Tucker Carlson MILF remark about Palin the other day, this is surprising???
On the other hand, neither should the government be under any obligation to provide security to the Westboro idiots. See how vocal they are when a thousand pissed-off funeral attendees converge upon them.
Sarah didn’t necessarily say it wasn’t the right decision, she just can’t understand why we can’t mention God in some places. I agree with her.
The title lies. Why not add a comment to the title saying that?
“What do you mean it’s not 1st Amendment protected to counter their picketing with a shotgun full of slugs?”