$5 million in damages. so the supreme court resumes, therefore, that ruling would be overturned and they would not get those damages. that if the phelps win, the damage award would be wiped out. there was an argument made about privacy, the privacy of this family is violated, the phelps, folks from this church had put some information about them online about their family online. that doesn t really that is a somewhat better argument, but, you know, when you are talking about a group that is engaged in a political protest, even if it s a lunatic protest, that s at the heart of what the first amendment is meant to protect, political protest. and the fact that these facts were arguably private, although it was the fact that one of the people in the family had been divorced, which is not really a private fact, it s hard for me to see how the court would let that be an end round, end run around the first amendment. justice scalia brought up,