A judge in New Hampshire ruled that authorities can investigate recordings from an Amazon Echo for clues to a double homicide.
1. Should the suspects recordings be entitled to constitutional protection? If so, which amendment(s) afford this protection?
Read the following case:
Fred Phelps founded the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas. His congregation believes that God hates and punishes the United States. The church members communicate their views by picketing at military funerals.
Albert Snyders son, Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, a member of the U. S. Marines Corps, was killed in Iraq in the line of duty. Snyder selected the Catholic church in his hometown of Westminster, Maryland, as the site of his sons funeral.
Phelps traveled to Maryland with six other Westboro Baptist parishioners to picket at the funeral service. They picketed from public land adjacent to a public street approximately 1,000 feet from the church. They carried placards that read God hates the USA/Thank God for 9/11 and America is doomed.
Other placards read Thank God for dead soldiers and Youre going to hell. They sang hymns and recited Bible verses.
The funeral procession passed within 200 to 300 feet of the picket site. Snyder sued Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland for intentional infliction of emotional distress and other state law tort claims. Phelps claimed his speech was protected by the First Amendment.
The jury found for Snyder and held Westboro liable for $2.9 million in compensatory damages and $8 million in punitive damages. However, the U.S. District Court reduced the punitive damages to $2.1 million.
Phelps appealed, and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the First Amendment protected Westboros speech and reversed the judgment. Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443, 131 S.Ct. 1207, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 1903 ((United States Courts2011).
2. Should Phelps and his congregations speech be protected under the First Amendment? Why or why not?
