The funeral verdict
As emotionally satisfying as the verdict was in the civil lawsuit against the Westboro Baptist Church, I don't think it will stand and probably ought not to stand.
Westboro Baptist Church, the charming "God hates fags" folks, were hit with $10.9 million in mostly punitive damages by a Federal Court jury in Baltimore. They had picketed the funeral of Marine Cpl. Matthew Snyder of Westminster, Md., who died in Iraq in March 2006. I wasn't there, but the Westboro morons typically wave signs saying that (insert name) died because God is punishing America for its tolerance of homosexuality. This church, as it were, is mainly Rev. Fred Phelps, a disbarred lawyer from Kansas, and 10 of his 13 children, many of whom are also lawyers.
Like the columnist Ann Coulter, they say and do outrageous and abhorrent things in the certain knowledge that at least some in the media will give them publicity. In my opinion, anyway--have to put in that disclaimer as the Westboro folks love to sue. They even announce on their website which military funerals they plan to picket next. Their protests, I would emphasize, have nothing to do with the Iraq war and everything to do with the rightwing, fundamentalist hatred of gay people.
So, nice to see them sued into the ground, right? Wrong. As offensive as this group is, the concept of having to pay millions of dollars in damages because your protest caused someone emotional distress is a scary one. The church members were standing 1,000 feet from the church where the funeral was held. The father, Albert Snyder of York, says he didn't see them on the day of the funeral but was deeply affected after reading news coverage of the protest and subsequent postings on the church website. I don't doubt for an instant that he WAS upset.
But I can imagine a situation where protestors against, say, the Iraq War, would end up getting sued by the wife of a soldier in Iraq on emotional distress grounds because she happened to be driving by and saw the signs. Or more pointedly, if protesters gathered on the sidewalk outside the home of a soldier or headquarters of a unit accused of war crimes in Iraq. That's not far-fetched. Indeed, we have a President who is so thin-skinned about protest that groups protesting his policy are forced by police to stay far out of his sight, and anyone who enters one of his speeches or rallies and even appears to maybe be a protester is forcibly removed.
Yesterday I called for a ban on displays of the Southern "battle flag," a well-known symbol of racism and the oppression of blacks. I did that because you can't argue or debate with a flag. It just sits there on the bumper sticker on the pick-up truck proclaiming its ugly message. The message of the Westboro Baptist Church is just as offensive, but at least you can go up and argue with them. Or punch them in the face if you want to risk an assault charge and lawsuit. If you punch a bumper sticker, you're just going to get a broken hand.
If the judgment against Westboro Baptist Church is allowed to stand, it will likely be because the court decides that Albert Snyder is not a public figure and is entitled to more protection than, say, Jerry Falwell was when Hustler magazine parodied him. Courts define a public figure as someone who "invites" news coverage because of his position or notoriety. Snyder meets neither test. He was a grieving parent of a dead Marine. If the court fashions its ruling on those narrow grounds, I could live with it.
Speaking of the First Amendment, the Harrisburg Patriot-News' sister newspaper, the Cleveland Plain-Dealer, is in a bit of hot water today over the firing of a liberal political blogger, Jeff Coryell. Coryell says Congressman Steve LaTourette, a Republican, complained to the Plain-Dealer after he started blogging for them and that was why he was fired. The P-D says it was because Coryell gave a hundred dollars to LaTourette's Democratic opponent.
Bloggers, especially outside bloggers, can pose difficulties for newspapers. After all, they're hired for their opinions. Coryell is a liberal. Is it any surprise he might give a modest contribution to a Democrat but still write about the Republican incumbent and call for his defeat? Unlike a reporter, no one expects a political blogger to be down-the-line objective. Not sure where the problem is, but newspapers are having a lot of trouble these days figuring out which end is up.