Those wacky Westborons won a round.

[pokeyburro]

Althouse on the Supreme Court ruling protecting the right to protest at funerals a la Westboro (or in any other style, naturally). Alito is the lone dissenter. Hmm. Not sure if I agree with his argument. (Maybe I do, while simply noting that proving intent is very hard, even WBC's

Comments

[thirdbase]

Yeah. I'm pretty much there with you. Right call, nasty group that shouldn't deserve the rights afforded them.

What we need now though, is someone with a law degree, a PhD in divinity and alot of balls to file a libel suit against WBC on behalf of God.

[vvalkyri]

What we need now though, is someone with a law degree, a PhD in divinity and alot of balls to file a libel suit against WBC on behalf of God.

Like.
Also tempted to metaquotes...

[whimmydiddle]

The only thing we can do is marginalize them as we do the Klan. Sadly, they're a lot smarter than the Klan, so nailing them on anything actually illegal (as opposed to anything Wrong) is unlikely.

[pokeyburro]

Well, there's always that mob of folks who offer to ride their Harleys up to funerals and rev their engines as loud as they go when WBC's chanting.

I was just thinking the other day - I had an idea for a sign to bring to one of these. I'm not much for protest couture, but this particular idea might be just the thing.

[vvalkyri]

Did you see the video by the guy who was doing a pro choice / pflag fundraiser at the counterprotest, with thankyou notes to be sent to Phelps?

[pokeyburro]

Didn't know about that, but it doesn't surprise me.

Me, I'd make a sign like this:

= REDICULOUS - X =
= RIDICULOUS - check =
= Get it right, people. =

[vvalkyri]

Dad had O'Reilley on, who had some ultraconservative blonde lady. I was somewhat boggled -- O'Reilley kept asking the blonde lawyerlady about Alito's argument, and she would point out that 8-1 is pretty conclusive, and that what the supreme court says is what the law is and what is constitutional, especially in 8-1

[pokeyburro]

From what little I know of O'Reilly, he probably just disagreed with Alito, and that was that.

It's probably interesting to figure out what premises Alito subscribes to that would make him dissent from the rest of what people popularly call the SC's conservative wing, and I likely would if I had the free time. All I recall from skimming the argument was that the WBC protest caused injury. That may be easier to prove in the case of fire in a crowded theater or directly inciting people to violence. Generally, their protests don't seem to quite meet that criterion (except through reverse psychology).

[vvalkyri]

No, no -- he was totally into Alito. He thought Alito was right and the other 8 justices wrong.

[pokeyburro]

whaaaaaaaat

...

...okay, that's just weird, then.