Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1808316
 


 



Snyder v. Phelps: A Slice of the Facts and Half an Opinion


Deana Pollard-Sacks


Texas Southern University - Thurgood Marshall School of Law

April 12, 2011

Cardozo Law Review De Novo, p. 64, 2011

Abstract:     
In Snyder v. Phelps, the Supreme Court reviewed only the picketing aspect of the case, and found that the First Amendment precluded tort liability. The Court declined to consider whether tort liability for the online "epic" that targeted the Snyders personally was constitutional. Snyder v. Phelps is a very narrow opinion and adds little to the debate about whether tort liability for invasion of privacy or intentional infliction of emotional distress arising from speech is constitutional.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 3

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: April 14, 2011  

Suggested Citation

Pollard-Sacks, Deana, Snyder v. Phelps: A Slice of the Facts and Half an Opinion (April 12, 2011). Cardozo Law Review De Novo, p. 64, 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1808316

Contact Information

Deana Pollard-Sacks (Contact Author)
Texas Southern University - Thurgood Marshall School of Law ( email )
3100 Cleburne Street
Houston, TX 77004
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 643
Downloads: 78
Download Rank: 189,503

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.313 seconds