Following the Supreme Court case of Snyder v. Phelps, in which the Phelps family protested outside the funeral of a Cpl. Snyder. Snyder's father filed suit for emotional distress, and in the original case, and the first appeal, the judges ruled in favor of the Snyder family. The last appeal saw the judge throw out the charges Snyder brought on the grounds of First Amendment rights. Now, the case is being reviewed by the Supreme Court.
I recently read a news article about this, in which Justice Scalia, Justice Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts stated they were looking for a way to rule in favor of the Snyder family; clearly Snyder have the moral high ground. But at the same time, the facts of the case heavily favor the Phelps family. They were exercising their First Amendment rights, a certain distance away from the funeral, and they stated that they were not attacking Cpl. Snyder personally, but rather the entire war effort, or something to that effect.
The two choices for the SC are that they establish new doctrine (or extend existing doctrine) for curtailing free speech rights, or they uphold our rights to speech/religion/petition. Here are two articles, the first one which I indirectly cited earlier, and the other one following up on it.
High court: Does father's pain trump free speech?
Funeral protesters make their case in and outside Supreme Court
My question to you: which way do you think the SC will rule, and why?