In Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, the Supreme Court limited claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress against the media by ruling that the First Amendment protects speech that is offensive or outrageous, as long as it is not made with actual malice. The case involved a parody ad in Hustler Magazine that attacked Jerry Falwell, a prominent religious leader, and political commentator. Falwell sued the magazine for intentional infliction of emotional distress, but the Supreme Court ruled that the ad was protected by the First Amendment and that Falwell could not recover damages for emotional distress caused by the ad. The decision established an important precedent for free speech and the limits of liability for media outlets.