A panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals initially overturned the verdict, holding that the activities were protected under the First Amendment because they did not directly threaten harm to the plaintiffs, and because the statements were not communicated privately to the plaintiffs.
A segment of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the verdict, maintaining that the activities were protected under the First Amendment due to their lack of direct threat to the plaintiffs and because the statements were not communicated privately.