Protecting Extreme Speech | Snyder v. Phelps
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 гру 2023
- Compare news coverage. Spot media bias. Avoid algorithms. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription by going to ground.news/mrbeat.
In episode 76 of Supreme Court Briefs, the Westboro Baptist Church decides to protest a dead soldier's funeral with signs like “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,” “God Hates Fags,” “You’re Going to Hell,” and “God Hates America.” The dead soldier's dad sues them.
Produced by Matt Beat and Beat Productions, LLC. All images/video by Matt Beat, Shannon Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by @silent-partner
Creative commons credits: JCWilmore
Mr. Beat's Supreme Court Briefs playlist: • Supreme Court Briefs
Related videos:
• When Does Speech Incit...
• When Can Speech Be Ban...
• Why Most People Lose D...
Here's an annotated script with footnotes: docs.google.com/document/d/1I...
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/2010/09-751
Other sources used/referenced:
www.uscourts.gov/educational-...
www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snyder_...
drexel.edu/law/about/news/Pub...
www.newsline.umd.edu/justice/w...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @iammrbeat
For business inquiries or to send snail mail to Mr. Beat:
www.iammrbeat.com/contact.html
/ iammrbeat
How to support and donate to my channel:
Subscribe to @iammrbeat & hit the notification bell 🔔
Join for great perks on Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate to Mr. Beat on Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Buy Mr. Beat a coffee: ko-fi.com/iammrbeat
Cameo: www.cameo.com/iammrbeat
Subscribe to my second channel: The Beat Goes On
Patreon for The Beat Goes On: / thebeatgoeson
Connect with me:
Links: linktr.ee/iammrbeat
Website: www.iammrbeat.com/
Podcast: anchor.fm/thebeatpod
Reddit: / mrbeat
@beatmastermatt on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Facebook: / iammrbeat
Instagram: / iammrbeat
Beatcord: / discord
TikTok: / iammrbeat
Merch:
matt-beat-shop.fourthwall.com/
www.bonfire.com/store/mr-beat/
sfsf.shop/support-mrbeat/
amzn.to/3fdakiZ
Affiliate Links:
Useful Charts: usefulcharts.com/?aff=12
Fourthwall: link.fourthwall.com/MrBeat
StreamYard: streamyard.com/pal/d/52723408...
#ushistory #supremecourt #apgovt
Snyder v. Phelps reaffirmed the principle that, even if speech is ridiculously offensive and unpopular, it’s still protected by the First Amendment. In other words, the government can’t restrict speech simply because it’s extremely distasteful or causes emotional harm. As long as you protest peacefully on public land, you can pretty much say the most outrageous things imaginable. Indeed, the Phelps still regularly do this.
Which Supreme Court case should I cover for this series next?
There's now an audiobook version of my Supreme Court book! amzn.to/3tr6dgl
Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 30% off your subscription: ground.news/mrbeat
I know this isn't a SCOTUS case but can you go over Joy Silk?
Miller v. California, please?
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sibelius, where they found that expansion of medicaid had to be made optional.
Talk about an obscure suggestion! @@raghavpatel720
Heck yeah @@KuominMessenger129
This is a perfect illustration of "what is right is not always legal, and what is legal is not always right."
It's Important to reinforce the 1st ammendment by protecting outrageous speech such that it doesn't make way to further attempts to undermine the 1st ammendment.
This is incorrect and a gross conflation of concepts. "What is right" is the protection of speech independent of its quality, and the law agrees with that being right. Is WBC right in its opinions about God's punishment? That's subjective (because technically it cannot be proven wrong regardless), that's not for the law to decide. It is not a matter of them being right or wrong, that has no relevance in this entire legal debate.
@@zxbc1Your response is measured and makes sense. When we start labeling certain speech as right and other speech as wrong in order to outlaw certain speech, then we risk jettisoning the First Amendment altogether.
Just as things should be.
Well... If you forbid this you have the draw the line somewhere.
Currently it's drawn the way that this is allowed.
If you draw it so that this isn't allowed you'll have arguments about pushing the line back and forth.
The court made the right ruling in this case, but the fact that the Westboro Baptist Church had to publicly justify picketing the funerals of dead soldiers like this shows exactly why they are one of the most scummy organizations in the country
I guess the rampant homophobia was within reason for you then.
@@renaigh Where’d you get that from? That’s a whole different sentence
@@renaigh as a 3rd generation farmer, I can say with confidence that your comment is, in fact, a straw man
@@renaighwell they have the right to be so you have the right to ignore it though
@@renaigh well your comment literally makes up an entire argument out of thin air. As already stated what you did is a straw man. Creating some argument not being made in order to change the subject from the original topic. It is so disingenuous when people do thia.
I’m gonna assume a lot of people didn’t watch past the ad read, but what you did is one of the most awesome and hilarious things. RESPECT Mr. Beat
Well thank you :)
I watched, well I scrolled down than back up when he started talking about the land. Truly an awesome move and a great way to deal with unpopular protected speech.
This comment made me watch til the end thank you
I think having a terrorist organization plastered on the front ruined it though
Thank you for this comment. I definitely would have missed that!
For me, the worst part about the Westboro Baptist Church is seeing how many kids are participating in their protests.
the worst part about any protest for me is how many kids Participate in them.
regardless of Political Affiliation.
If it makes you feel any better, the Westboro Baptist Church was never a big church and was mostly just consisted of Fred Phelps’s extended family. It has shrunk even further since the founder’s death.
But so many other kids in US are being subjected to similar indoctrination. It is simply legal and protected to indoctrinate kids in this country. And it can even be argued that it is a good thing, given that in order to legislate the opposite requires a level of intervention into families that the vast majority of the public will deem as legal overreach of government. So no, it's not the worst part, it's just a necessary vice for what people call freedom. You always have some trade off between welfare and freedom, and never is it more clear as it is the case in good old USA.
Bunch of his children left the 'church' as soon as they turned 18, and he was an abusive dad on top of that and their family was a mess... 😕 Typically when I heard about Westboro Baptist Church I had a certain type of 'respect' for people who actually live their claimed believes (the same fucked up respect that I have for e.g. muslim terrorists that make an informed decision to do what they do)... but reading up a bit on them finally now it turns out that that really wasn't the case. So yeah, more of a fucked up cult than anything really.
It is indeed sad
I grew up a half hour from Westminster, so this particular supreme court hit close to home. I never liked the ruling, but in hindsight it had to be made. Free speech is essential to our democracy, period.
Well put and represent!
We do NOT have a democracy, we have a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. If we had a democracy, this would be against the majority public opinion and thus likely would be persecuted. Because we are a Republic, who in theory follow the Constitution, speech which includes 'hate' speech is protected so we do not become "two wolves and a sheep voting for what's for dinner"
When Fred Phelps died, i wanted to go to his funeral, with a sign saying "saying I hate signs." Sadly i was a broke college student.
Better, no reason to spend any time doing anything that has to do with that guy
They didn’t have a public funeral for him anyway and didn’t bother to bury him in a public cemetery 😅
@@jljordan1 Wow, shocking! I wonder why :p
I was proud to join a counter protest against the Westoboro Baptist Church who had actually threatened to protest a local soldier's funeral. I live in a small town, and the counter protest was one of the largest gatherings I had ever seen in my town. Needless to say I was very proud of them even though the WBC never showed up. But what they do shouldn't be illegal, even though it is obviously messed up and wrong.
Thanks for doing that.
This is how this needs to be dealt with. Freedom of speech applies both ways.
Expressing their extreme views should not be illegal. Blocking traffic, interfering in a funeral, even from public property, is aggression.
When I first moved to Topeka, I was outraged the first time I saw the Phelpses protesting. Now that I've been here a few years, they're kind of just an annoyance. Whenever me or my partner sees them now, we play a game to try to guess what they were protesting this time.
I can relate to this. I've seen them enough that it doesn't shock me anymore.
I lived in next door Missouri for some years and every time they came to St. Louis to protest, all the people that drove by rebuked them with car horns in their face and/or curses at their face. There were also counter protests almost every time. It's a free country, if they can be nasty, you can be nasty back at them. You don't have to be hateful like they are, but you can be as disrespectful as you want to them, and that's kind of fun, because let's be honest, how often can you be so disrespectful in public and not be seen as an asshole?
I always thought they had disrupted the funeral procession, I never realized it was off the cemetery’s premises. While a disgusting thing to do, it should be protected.
Yes, many were being dishonest about it and were pretending that they were "right there" disrupting them. In fact, the protest ended before the funeral even began.
Burials, by their very nature, can't be held indoors. People who paid good money to the cemetary to have a loved one interred and who are attending the burial are being deprived of the use and enjoyment of what their money has paid for by demonstrations of this nature. It isn't the opinion that's being punished, but the action of interfering with the peace and tranquility people have a right to enjoy at a sorrowful time.
@@johnsavard7583 They ended the protest before the funeral began so this wasn't an issue in this case.
@@loszhorstill disrespectful and hurtful, I’m sure. Still, morality should always be stricter than the law, in my opinion, and while I think what they did should be considered immoral, it makes sense it was ruled legal.
@@libbybollinger5901 "morality should always be stricter than the law" This will be too subjective for both our liking in the end.
As a Christian I always feel frustrated that these people can’t just keep their opinions to themselves. Whether or not it’s legal for extreme speech to exist or not, its an absolute shitty move to cause a ruckus near the funeral of a dead veteran.
They are about as anti-Christian as I've seen with the rhetoric. Jesus wasn't about hate. He was about love.
As an agnostic, I agree with you.
I know, right? I'm an atheist, but even I know that real Christians do not act like this.
Yep. But what are you gonna do? The First Amendment is a powerful thing. Maybe it needs to be amended? But if so, how specifically?
I've never cared for religion but Jesus is one of my favorite historic figures. He wouldn't abide by these lunitics for even a second.
This group protested my high school back when I was a senior. They were furious we had a gsa with a staff member sponsoring it.
Looking back it was heartwarming just how much they were overshadowed by the community’s counter protests.
Whether or not someone is Christian, they can recognize that the goal is love and not hate. Horrifying how these people can become so twisted by hate
I've never met any Christian(and as a Christian, I agree with this) who consider them one of us. Theologically liberal or conservative, we all consider them a cult who completely miss the point of Christianity. We're all called to love our neighbor and their theology needs a lot of work. They're more like the Pharisees(i.e hypocrites who think they can law their way to heaven) than actual Christians
I feel like we don’t give the westboro Baptist church enough credit
They United the left and the right through how awful they were
I personally attended a funeral where this group (or some other related group) protested. Everyone in the family was forewarned about them being there and to not engage them. No one wanted to make things worse than it already was but it was so upsetting! I'm glad we were mentally prepared for the absolute hate that had nothing to do with the hero who died but to this day, it's upsetting to remember that hateful presence. I don't understand how they can actually believe they're Christians when they are so un-Christlike.
One of Fred Phelps' granddaughters is Megan Phelps-Roper, I believe she is also the daughter of Shirley Phelps-Roper, the WBC attorney mentioned in this video. Megan Phelps-Roper quit the WBC and has become an outspoken critic of it (her family cut all ties with her). She was on Joe Rogan's podcast aming other things and it is definitely worth listening to her.
I'm glad someone mentioned this. Her interview and the one with Leah Remini are two must-watch episodes. I haven't been a fan of the Rogan podcast for a while, but those two are worth a view.
She has, by far my favorite, Ted talk of all time. It truly is a beautiful thing when people admit their wrongdoings and do everything they can to spread influence in a positive light.
I’m morally conflicted on this one but ultimately do agree with the Court here
Anyway I just finished a Constitutional Law class and I would recommend Kimble v Marvel, Wickard v Filburn, Raines v Baird, and Nixon v United States.
I also wanna see some recent ones like Lac Du Flambeau v Coughlin and Moore v Harper
Do you agree from the technical standpoint (that this kind of speech IS indeed protected) or the moral standpoint (that this kind of speech SHOULD be protected)?
Dang, thanks for all those suggestions
@@vitoravila9908 Not OP, but I think that this kind of speech should be protected. I don't have enough of a legal background to weigh on the former.
@@vitoravila9908 I agree in the technical (or legal) standpoint that it is indeed protected. I think it is protected in the exact same sense that if I wanted to after his death, I could have protested against the west burrow baptist church after his death and be protected in my speech.
@@lewis_base Well the former question is moot for the Court since they don't answer questions on morality they answer based upon what the law states.
The line between free speech, extreme speech, and hate speech has always been fascinating to me. It's clearly a modern debate whose outcome will determine a lot of how our culture works in the coming decades. Thank you for covering it!
*Obligatory jab at Elon Musk and twitter*
Hi Stoney lol
Heck yeah!
FWIW: legally there is no "line". Extreme speech and hate speech are as protected by the 1st amendment as any other speech. That is arguably the whole point of the 1st amendment.
What are you doing here?
I'm pretty sure that in the USA, hate speech is free speech unlike most European countries. And extreme speech, if not hateful, is free speech in all democracies to my knowledge.
I'm from Olathe, and have counter protested these awful people. Truly a stain on our great state.
Everyone: PLEASE watch past the sponsor reading, Mr. Beat’s last bit takes this video from great to perfect!
This “church” even protested at a vigil for Alicia Debolt in Great Bend in 2010.
Let’s just say they only lasted 10 minutes before being driven out of town.
That at the end there was an incredible show of empathy and human dignity.... I'm not crying, you're crying. Thanks, Mr. Beat for that and for a great video summary of this important topic.
As for the court case, unfortunately I have to agree with their decision to protect free speech. What the Westboro Baptist Church did and continues to do is vile, but certainly legal. I can only hope that as time goes on we as human beings will continue to learn and grow in our empathy of one another, and more and more people will leave churches like these.
I have a feeling the Westboro Baptist Church doesn’t believe what it’s saying (or is even religious), I think that what they’re trying to do is offend people enough for them to act out of turn and give the church grounds to sue for unprovoked assault
In summer 1996, one of Fred Phelps’ associates took a summer class at K-State. He had an idea of mirroring that infamous website using his student computer account.
It attracted so much traffic that it interfered with other students ability to do their homework (including me).
The Provost forced him to take the website off K-State’s servers. I don’t recall whether he was expelled from K-State or not.
Each protester having to hold that many signs says a lot 😂about
"And ordered the father to pay back the court fees"
I hope the westburrow baptists pay a visit to any funeral that judge goes to.
The ending was heartwarming! I love to see those little signs of support, it's nothing much but you probably don't realize how much it affects me (positively, of course). Thank you so much!
As much as it hurts to admit- I kinda agree with the Supreme Court's decision. Not that the WBC had anything of value to say, of course. I just fear an opposing decision would have set a precedent for protests potentially being able to be legally punished for vague definitions of "emotional harm"
While Westboro was protected under the 1st amendment, that clearly does not mean they were free of consequence.
Well, the consequences apparently were not bad enough
It’s worth noting that the Patriot Guard Riders was formed in 2005 as an honor guard for veteran funerals to counteract protesters
What you did at the end was one of highest demonstrations of humanity ❤️ something that may not directly affect you or concern you, yet you decide to have a poster impact on so many people’s lives, I don’t regret subscribing to this channel a lot ago. LET’S GO MR. BEAT!!
Just got your Supreme Court book for Christmas and can’t wait to start reading it! I know this is one of your least watched series, but I personally love it. Thanks for continuing it Mr.Beat!
I appreciate you getting it!
@@iammrbeatyou must do next video about favorite book of every U.S. presidents
Have a Happy New Year Mr Beat!! Stay healthy and happy, we need you disseminating and broadcasting history / politics for a long time!
Besticles.
This series has gotten better and better in terms of production! Keep up the good work!
0:14 He was a Marine, not a soldier. Solders are in the US Army
High quality video, informative, interesting, and explains subjects I might know little about. That is what I need from a UA-cam channel. Thanks Mr Beat!
The same can’t be said for the WBC.
I live in Westminster and this court case is a crazy part of the towns history. Sorry to see how local conservatives are responding to the influx of people here, and trying to ban books in our schools.
What's that now?
I remember this one. I was in elementary school and I remember the really bad things Phelps said.
I'm sure it was traumatic. :/
An important footnote about the first amendment is that it states "CONGRESS shall make no law...", it has NOTHING to do with private establishments. I see folks complaining about social media platforms' terms of service citing, "what about free speech?" but that doesn't apply to private companies. The first amendment applies to "places owned by the government".
Social media platforms are best conceptualized as a bar, a very, very, large bar with millions or even billions of patrons. It is the right of the bar owner to specify whatever dress code or code of conduct they want their patrons to follow.
You DON'T have the right to act however you want in someone else's bar. You DO however have the right to open up your own bar and make up whatever dress code or code of conduct you want for your own bar. Same applies online, don't like UA-cam's terms of service? You're free to make your own website and put whatever you want there,
Nothing screams, "I don't understand the Bill of Rights" more than people thinking the first amendment applies to private establishments.
Cheers
when I was an eighth grader living a block north of Washburn University in Topeka Kansas, Fred Phelps and his gang were protesting by the crosswalk and Fred tells one of his followers, push the crosswalk button for that young man, as I was walking my bike across. it was so unsettling to have him interact with me when I was just walking by minding my own business.
Mr. Beat, thank you very much for responding to my request!
As a graduate of the university in Topeka, this case, along with the Brown case, is essential to my in-depth understanding of my relationship with 🇺🇲.
The Westboro church and devotees parading around with their roadside placards near Walmart also made me miss with all my heart the days (about 5 years ago now) when I watched from a bus...the last punchline made me 🤣
From an everyday 🇯🇵 man…
I read Alito's dissent and it has strong undertones of a "right and virtuous nation" beneath it, with additional seasonings of "you can't say things that hurt other's feelings too much" (which for him have flopped between decisions, see Saxe v. State College Area School District, USA v Stevens, Pleasant Grove v Summum, et al.)
Alito's intentions in this dissent read pretty clearly, and though I'm not surprised, trying to get a loophole in the system to strike down speech on grey-lines is not commendable.
Never heard of this case, but I was certain how the court was gonna rule. Mr. Beat, you do an awesome job summarizing both points and providing context
What hurt this family, and others, cases with the public when this all happened is dishonesty on their part and their perceived motives. I didn't learn until later after seeing it on TV that WBC were over a 1,000 feet away, didn't disrupt the funeral, notified the police and the funeral directors, only protested for about 30 minutes, AND IT ENDED before the funeral even began. Plus the father even testified that he couldn't even read what the signs said as he drove by. When the media got involved then there was a lot of incentive to go after them. Also, some funeral goers that were picketed allegedly didn't even know that they were there until much later from media outlets. Always follow the money.
While I was in law school, I attended a church in Topeka that was often protested by the Phelpses. The real key to dealing with them is to simply ignore them and treat them like they don't exist. They're all like a much meaner version of Colin Robinson from "What We Do in the Shadows." They feed on your negative reactions.
I love your content mr beat I’m 18 and I just now started getting into American history, thanks for fun educational videos :)
Best series! Thanks Mr. Beat! Other than compared, presidents, and every series.
lol thank you so much
MR. Beat I just want you to know how happy we get when we see a new Mr Bear video, hope you had a Merry Christmas, and you and your family have a happy New Year
It's a good thing to not restrict speech by the government. Censorship of speech of subjects of public concern is a slippery slope no matter how wrong or distasteful the speech may be.
Unless it's defamation or incites violence, I generally agree. There are always exceptions.
True, but aggression against people attending funerals isn't just speech. It's action; it interferes with people enjoying a peaceful, tranquil setting for a solemn ceremony. So the problem isn't the content of the speech, it is the disturbance. And there should be no obligation to have anything beyond zero tolerance for acts of aggression.
That's a very american take. Many liberal democracies have laws against hate speech or denial of crimes against humanity and that's far from the biggest concern when it comes to attacks against democracy
@@TheGalaxyWings Those are not liberal policies. John Locke is very clear on this.
Freedom of Speech doesn't exist for popular speech. Protection of it is only required for expression so contrary to social norms that it is at threat of being banned by law, as your Illiberal European democracies have foolishly embraced.
@@iammrbeatagreed. That exception doesn’t include January 6th and trump
I love this series so much Mr Beat! Please make it a regular upload!
I just wish more folks watched it!
@@iammrbeat While the views may be lower than your other videos, know I will continue to watch it. I appreciate the hard work you put into them. I use them regularly in the US history' class I teach.
Thank you@@ahegaoqueen64 ...that means a lot!
@@iammrbeat I second it! Even if doesn't have as many views it sure isn't as fun reading supreme court rulings in all that legalese.
@iammrbeat I run to watch them when I see them. Or any of your uploads really!
Thak you for all the high quality content! Bonan novajnaron! Happy New year!
I love the idea of this as a series. When I was in college trying to learn more about the world I gave reading the briefs a shot but that was over my head at the time. Knowing the steps along the way along with media context is pretty helpful
5:18 even Rachel Maddow was shocked by the appeals court ruling, and openly sided with the family as well.
When you have Rachel Maddow (a progressive liberal) and Bill O Reailly (a strong conservative) oh the same side of an issue, its a miracle 😄
As distasteful as the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church may be, I believe the Supreme Court decision was correct. That being said, BRAVO to you Mr. Beat for the houses you purchased across from😂 their church.
He didnt purchase them
As many others said, I think the court made the right decision, but it sucks that the Westboro Baptist Church can't be held to account for their misdeeds. They're such an awful organization, and I'm just glad they aren't as relevant as they once were.
What a wonderful video. Thanks for this series Mr. Beat.
God, I hadn't thought about the westboro baptist church in ages. Thankful that their relevancy has only dwindled as time goes on. Also, if I remember right at least one of Shirley's daughters made it out of the church and seems to be living a mostly normal life, makes me happy :)
In a way, I'm glad this group has largely fallen off the media's radar since the late 2010s and I am happy to see the defectors still with us now fighting for the greater good, esp Lauren and Megan! However, at this point, even if it's inevitable this group does indeed come to an end (either due to lack of interest, financial problems, an unexpected criminal case, or the handful of remaining members choosing to see the light/make amends) it's sad how the group's discourse lives on, as seen in the homophobic/transphobic rhetoric embraced by today's far right. As a society, if there's something to learn from them, it's important to stand up to all forms of bigotry in a peaceful manner, and as demonstrated by people like Megan Phelps Roper, some people who embody prejudice are capable of change!
I live in Westminster and this was a story in the area for the next 10 and even now there is a story or 2 a year about it.
Dang, they really shook things up there.
@@iammrbeat at the time most people were in favor of overall free speech but now it is more 50/50
Hi Mr Beat,
I am studying the Flint Water Crisis in university currently, doing many essays and stuff on it. I was wondering if you could do an episode of SCB on Mays v Snyder as it is relevant to the water crisis.
Would be really useful :))
Thanks for the videos from the UK
Had to deal with these knuckleheads as well... went to the service for Joe Anzack, a HS classmate of mine, at the high school; there were WBC zealots out on the street and all I could do was shake my head at them...
OK, I DID also give them the finger on my way to the parking lot, but I can't imagine being that deep into a cult.
Ooooo I’ve been WAITING for this one!!!!
Heck yeah
The funeral is not for the person in the box it’s for the family who loved that person. The very least you can do is be respectful and keep your 1st Amendment to yourself. If you don’t like the person, stay away.
If there are sins, God can take care of whatever needs taking care of. That’s His job.
Babe wake up, it’s a new Supreme Court briefs
woot woot
One thing I appreciate is that the public image of Kansans as a whole was never tarnished by Westborough Baptist Church. They protested at a local high school after it chose a gay student as prom king (technically prom queen, I believe, but you get the idea), and the counterprotest drew students from across the school district, dwarfing the size of the actual WBC protest.
This was honestly an easy case. Otherwise, people could sue people for the content of their speech just because they were offended by it
Free Speech for all, or Free Speech for none.
Even if the WBC can go fuck itself.
a shining example of "yes, free speech unfortunately must include the assholes."
LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO NEW MR. BEAT!!!
You're the best!!!
Happy New Year to you and thank you!
Mr. Beat deserves many likes & comments on this video. (Make this video climb with views from engagement!) What he did at the end is beyond exceptional. Mr. Beat, YOU - are - AWESOME
Hey Mr Beat. I know that you generally focus on US topics, but I was wondering if you could cover any of the EU supreme court decisions? They're very important, yet not a single UA-camr has ever talked about them. As a civics teacher, this is a little sad to me. There's not a lot of publicly digestable information about the EU, which is a shame.
Either way, another great video :) These are awesome and you manage to keep them delightfully fun to watch
Iont think he gonna
Let me see if I can talk M.Laser into it when I see him in a few months. :)
@@iammrbeat That's great!
Cause the EU is lame
Wild to know this happened in my hometown at a church I've been to
Holy crap. Westminster represent!
I'm from eldersburg, same county, and so I grew up hearing about this case as it was happening before it became national news
Okay but that selfie with them in the background was just epic! 😂
Oh Boy I can't wait for the Snyder Cut version of this Court Case
The court got right on this one. Even nasty, offensive speech should be protected, even if it is disrespectful
I agree
I disgreed
It is not the job of the law. It is up to society and social policing. Japan has a strict social code, and so do many parts of America, especially liberal and religious areas, but legally in both places you can say whatever you want.
@@linuxman7777 it is up to the law because the constitution, specifically the 1st amendment says so
@@martimsousa2601 why do you disagree?
Banning hate groups and symbols only helps them. Groups like these thrive on the idea that they are being repressed, that they possess some special information that those in power want silenced. Banning them only reinforces this claim.
Ignoring them takes away their strength.
Big fan of your videos, Supreme Court briefs are very interesting
I appreciate the support!
I feel like when the Westboro Baptist Church holds these protests, it’s less about God, but using God as a cudgel for any far right political messaging.
I’ve actually been told ages ago once via their own twitter account - when I had an account - that, at the time, they (at least almost all of them anyway) were registered democrats.
For once this is something controversial within modern America that ISN’T about right vs left. For example this group had Bill O’Reily AND Rachel Maddow BOTH speaking against them.
Mr. Beat this is actually episode 77 of Supreme Court briefs, not episode 76
Happy new year Beat sorry I'm wishing you very early
The idea of the Westboro Baptist Church and the ACLU teaming up is mind-boggling to me 😭
This is one of those rights which I think is very unique to America. The government is constitutionally prohibited from making a distinction between hateful and nonhateful speech. Even many Europeans I talk to are often bewildered as to why Americans take such pride in allowing public displays of hate. In Germany for instance, it is still illegal to display certain Nazi related symbols.
In reality however, people like the Westboro Baptists shoot themselves in the foot when they do these outrageous demonstrations because theres nothing that could be more of a turn off than meeting one of these people in real life.
The United States continues to be the world leader for freedom of speech (for better or for worse)
How are we supposed to know who the morons are if they’re not allowed to say anything?
I really enjoyed this video, especially the end. ❤
As a gay Christian who grew up in Topeka going to a church down the street from WBC, their rhetoric damaged me in critical times of my development. It's really hard to ignore hate, even when you're completely aware the people doing the hating are unbelievably in the wrong
My favorite series, thank you! Please cover National Federation of Independent Business v Sibelius, where they found that Medicaid expansion had to be optional. :)
Thank you and right on!
I don't say it a lot, but I really like Alito's dissent in this case for once:
"In order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated, it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like [Mr. Phelps]".
Justice Ginsburg spoke very fondly of it, and Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired the previous year, said he would have joined it. Personally, it's a big reason why this is the one case I always go back and forth on.
I have two suggestions for future videos:
1. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, specifically in honor of Justice O'Connor. Her aside, it's still an important and overlooked case about the abuse of power and the right of the country to defend itself.
2. Hollingsworth v. Perry. A personal favorite of mine, this case almost legalized gay marriage in America 2 years before Obergefell. This case is especially relevant, because the law that caused it, California Proposition 8, will be repealed next year.
Edit: so I was thinking more about the case again. while I do think this discussion should be had eventually, the courts are not the right place for it.
I just think it would have opened up a can of worms because folks could say they were offended by all kinds of stuff. Thanks for the suggestions! You sure do know your court cases. :)
@@iammrbeat You're welcome. Honestly, I'm not sure this isn't a can of worms that should be left closed. But that's a dilemma for another time.
@@alonkatz4633 Its such an odd situation because I, like most people, abhor the westboro baptist church. But censoring even their words would open a can of worms like Mr Beat said. At that point we would have incredibly vague laws on language that has the potential to snowball into an overwhelming amount of cases that are due to emotional damage. With our current society being as sensitive as it is, this would be an issue. It also starts as something like "stopping offensive speech" but then can turn into laws that favor specific political ideologies and that's dangerous.
@Gruso57 unfortunately with the current status of free speech, it favors one ideology over others. Nazis don't get a platform in Germany. Can we at least draw the line there? Didn't we fight a war over this?
Alito was dead wrong as usual.
If this lawsuit was allowed, then any tort where a person was offended by the content of someone else's speech would be allowed. That would have a chilling effect on free speech.
Imagine if you had a bunch of protesters peacefully protesting the Vietnam War. If there were some soldiers who were emotionally disturbed by the protests, then they could sue the protestors.
The Westboro Baptist Church was on public land making statements of public concern
I’ve been using your Texas v. Johnson video the past few years to introduce protection of controversial speech in Gov class. I might have to switch it up and use this one next semester!
Why not both? :)
Hi Mr. Beat I love your Supreme Court videos! Can you please make a video about Hamdi v Rumsfeld?
I love you videos, its hard to find some people who do videos like you, that dont have a massive bias
I appreciate the kind words. I do try to be as objective as possible.
Sounds like someone didn’t watch the ending or don’t know what bias means.
@@timr.2257 what trolling them by supporting gay people? Every one is going to have biases, but any info channel that has some personality normally has massive bias effecting every single peace of info they give out
@@timr.2257 I like his JFK video because most jfk videos push a certain narrative
This is an example of a case where the Supreme Court did the right thing even under political pressure. Even though that protest was quite distasteful, it still should be protected because who knows what would happen if peaceful protest was able to be prevented by simply being controversial.
I really wish this sort of thing was more consistent among them.
I knew Mr. Snyder. He was a salesman for a steel supply company, and talked with him on the phone all the time.
Fred, in that picture and probably today, looks like a mummy
I file this under the same category as public defenders representing murderers and sex offenders. If the worst people aren't given the right to representation at a trial, then we ultimately don't have that right. If the most heinous and offensive speech is not allowed, we don't have a right to free speech.
It's obviously gross and horrific what they said, but I ultimately agree with the decision.
Ending of the video was worth waiting for
This year, I've witnessed a group from the Westboro Baptist Church protesting outside of my school. Best thing I did was to ignore the protest and just attend school like every typical weekday.
Well, I think that had the court sided with Snyder, the church wouldn't have obeyed any orders. As someone who is much wiser than me once said "you really can't stop the real idiots from being idiots."
As a trans jewish (ethnically) atheist who comes from a military family as much as I utterly despise the church I sided with them since the start.
If we revoke their freedom of speech we become the evil they say we are.
I think the real issue is that people actually believe things the WBC believes...
Not *every* one of their signs are trash, though. The ones about obedience to God are just fine, and some of their other issues like anti-abortion have a lot of supporters, including myself.
It’s so weird that I was born in the time period of the case and hearing “in todays money” being used
You are a shining beacon of social media education my friend. 😊
You should cover _Coleman v. Miller_ or _Shelby v. Kraemer._
Right on Sam