Held: The First Amendment shields Westboro from tort liability for its picketing in this case. Pp. 5–15. (a) The Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment can serve as a defense in state tort suits, including suits for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U. S. 46, 50-51. Whether the First Amendment prohibits holding Westboro liable for its speech in this case turns largely on whether that speech is of public or private concern, as determined by all the circumstances of the case. “[S]peech on public issues occupies the ‘ “highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values” ’ and is entitled to special protection.” Connick v. Myers, 461 U. S. 138, 145.Obviously, there is a lot more there than that, but there you are.
I should add that if they had been saying things that were specifically about the individuals involved, rather than general things about society/country/etc/., they would not have been protected. That’s the key: private vs. public concern.
Megyn Kelly, long before the decision was issued, predicted the outcome and that it would turn on just this issue: private vs. public concern.