Abstract
From a scholarly and professional perspective, the Supreme Court’s decision in Snyder v. Phelps added little to the development of free speech doctrine. As a normative matter, the Court’s role in the resolution of this case is hard to justify or explain.
In this short piece, we reflect on the normative costs of the Court’s decision and raise additional constitutional questions not addressed by the Court in its decision.
In this short piece, we reflect on the normative costs of the Court’s decision and raise additional constitutional questions not addressed by the Court in its decision.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 43-45 |
Number of pages | 3 |
Journal | Cardozo Law Review de novo |
Volume | 43 |
State | Published - 2011 |