Snyder v. Phelps: A Prediction Based on Oral Arguments and the Supreme Court's Established Speech-Tort Jurisprudence

Abstract

Snyder v. Phelps presents the Supreme Court with the issue of whether tort liability for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress violates the First Amendment. This essay analyzes the facts of Snyder v. Phelps and the Court's questions and comments during oral arguments in the larger context of the Court's established speech-tort jurisprudence. The essay concludes that the Court appears poised to reverse the Fourth Circuit and to allow Mr. Snyder a "constitutionalized" tort remedy consistent with established speech-tort precedent concerning tort liability arising from speech where the plaintiff is a private individual, the speech is not of public concern, or both.

Keywords: Speech Torts, Private Concern, Private Individual, First Amendment, New York Times v. Sullivan, Gertz v. Welch