Abstract

 


 



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


Deana Pollard-Sacks


Texas Southern University - Thurgood Marshall School of Law; Florida State University

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
Florida State University
Tallahasse, FL 32306
United States
7139279935 (Phone)
7138630502 (Fax)

Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 548
Downloads: 69
Download Rank: 170,494

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.344 seconds