What Does It Mean?

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress versus the First Amendment

(here I switch hats from Youtube junkie to real lawyer)

Can anyone really say or do anything to you really mean, nasty and hurtful and get away with it? Well, in certain extreme circumstances, it could support a claim for the tort of "intentional infliction of emotional distress." Contrary to what you learned as a youth about sticks and stones breaking bones but names never hurting you, in fact the Supreme Court dicta in a recent case says otherwise.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/09-751.ZS.html

The case, famously reported now everywhere is about the Westboro Baptists who picketed the funeral of one serviceman (they do it lots of places) and his family took umbridge and sued them. At the lower court they won millions, the amount was later reduced a bit and the Baptists took it all the way to the Supreme Court on First Amendment Free Speech grounds.

What is really remarkable here is that the Court carved or clarified a further distinction between what is called "public speech" and "private speech."
If someone is ranting and railing about political matters, or matters touching on public policy, or issues that concern the nation as the Baptists were doing (whether you like their positions or not) in yelling about God's chastisement of the nation over issues of gay marriage and the like,
the Court found that we can't stifle political speech. We have far too great an interest in letting people voice their opinions on matters of public policy or issues that touch the public at large. So even if you don't like it, or find it annoying or harassing, get over it, it's their opinion and they have a right to it.

The dicta is that it is obviously a far different story if it is a private matter. There by inference if not overtly stated the tortious claim of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress still should be allowed to hold water if things said support it. Private means something that isn't a public policy issue- something 'private.' So sticks and stones may break your bones, but name calling might get you sued in tort for intentional infliction of emotional distress- think Bullying. That is something no one should have to hear.

The Supremes got this one Supremely right.