# Stolen Valor Act ruled unconstitutional. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2010, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721 "2010-08-19T06:06:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/1 "2010-08-19T06:06:06Z")
And i think it’s a good decision., even though i suspect that the Supreme Court might end up overturning it. We’ve discussed this law on these boards [before](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=539655), of course, and i maintained on those occasions that, while lying about military service and honors is a rather repugnant act that is worthy of contempt and ridicule, it should not be subject to legal sanctions unless it is done in order to make a material gain through fraud or deception. It seems that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agrees, as they’ve just declared the law unconstitutional in a 2-1 decision. In their ruling, they presented a similar argument to the one i have made above, [saying](http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/18/stolen-valor-act-is-declared-unconstitutional-by-circuit-court/): > [@](#): > > “We have no doubt that society would be better off if Mr. Alvarez would stop spreading worthless, ridiculous and offensive untruths,” the ruling said. “But, given our historical skepticism of permitting the government to police the line between truth and falsity, and between valuable speech and drivel, we presumptively protect all speech, including false statements.” They also specifically noted that the defendant in the case, Xavier Alvarez, had not done any harm with his false claims, as those claims were made during some offhand remarks at the beginning of a Water Board meeting. The defendant has also, in the past: > [@](#): > > claimed to have played hockey for the Detroit Red Wings and to have rescued the American ambassador during the Iranian hostage crisis. The court found that the government had not shown a compelling need to restrict claims about military honors, and it also noted that the motivation to honor the troops could be satisfied in ways other than restricting freedom of expression. This last factor is, i think, one of the things that most perplexed me about the people who argued in support of these laws. Many of these supporters argued that allowing people to boast of medals they never earned devalues the service and the sacrifice of the real soldiers. I never found this very compelling; my respect for those who fight is in no way diminished by the presence of a few lying douchebags. The fact that some blowhard can claim to have won medals when he was never in the armed forces is in no way a reflection on those who do serve. I think a [judge in Denver](http://www.denverpost.com/news/frontpage/ci_15536854) said it best last month, when he dismissed charges in a Stolen Valor case, and called the Act unconstitutional: > [@](#): > > U.S. District Judge Robert E. Blackburn issued his decision Friday and rejected the prosecution’s argument that lying about having military medals dilutes their meaning and significance. > > “This wholly unsubstantiated assertion is, frankly, shocking and, indeed, unintentionally insulting to the profound sacrifices of military personnel the Stolen Valor Act purports to honor,” Blackburn wrote. “To suggest that the battlefield heroism of our servicemen and women is motivated in any way, let alone in a compelling way, by considerations of whether a medal may be awarded simply defies my comprehension.” ---
**Author:** ![godix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/278dde/32.png) [@godix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godix)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/2 "2010-08-19T12:06:32Z")
I can see the issue from either side, depending on the situation. If the guy is just making crap up to make himself look good, as it appears it was in this case, then fine. Let him. It’s no different than guys who claim to have a 9 inch penis. Eventually someone who cares will be in a position to know he’s lying, and things probably won’t go well after that. OTOH I could see a law in cases where a guy is lying to benefit himself. For example, if he’s claiming military service/awards to gain veterans benefits, to appear more trustworthy as part of a scam, or to get elected to some office or another then it seems to me to be more of an issue of fraud than lying. I think these sorts of hypotheticals are already illegal though. I don’t believe I can claim I earned a gold star for not peeing my pants in combat in order to try winning an election, when the truth is I’ve never served at all. If I’m wrong on that, then perhaps a law like this is needed. Suitably limited and written specifically to target fraud instead of just plain lying of course, which the Stolen Valor Act is not. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/3 "2010-08-19T12:14:30Z")
Well, I made a strong argument on this issue (or perhaps my critics would say that I argued, strongly but poorly) that the Act was constitutional, based on the lack of case law finding otherwise. Of course the Supremes may still weigh in, but inasmuch as there’s now precedential case law saying otherwise, it behooves me to say: looks like I was wrong-o. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/4 "2010-08-19T12:22:19Z")
> [@godix](#): > > OTOH I could see a law in cases where a guy is lying to benefit himself. For example, if he’s claiming military service/awards to gain veterans benefits, to appear more trustworthy as part of a scam, or to get elected to some office or another then it seems to me to be more of an issue of fraud than lying. I think existing fraud laws would cover that stuff. I’m sure they would cover something like veterans’ benefits. I said in the previous thread that I didn’t have a problem with these laws (I didn’t think there was much comparison between, say, wearing a military costume for Halloween and telling people you served in the special forces), but I don’t have a real objection to this decision either. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/5 "2010-08-19T12:25:28Z")
Given the high bar that any law that touches upon free speech must clear to be considered constitutional, I’m not surprised. As noted already on the thread, cases of actual material fraud are covered by existing laws that have (I presume) been tested in court. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/6 "2010-08-19T15:19:43Z")
Next you’ll be claiming that we can’t pass laws banning burning the flag or performing blasphemy. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/7 "2010-08-19T15:31:09Z")
As a former Green Beret Kung Fu instructor and combat veteran of 3 wars, I have to say this is a good decision. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/8 "2010-08-19T15:38:39Z")
Well, as I told Bill Brennan when I was helping him write the Texas v. Johnson decision, someday you’re going to regret this overbreadth freedom. But Bill was just a headstrong kinda guy. ---
**Author:** ![qpw3141](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/6bbea6/32.png) [@qpw3141](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qpw3141)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/9 "2010-08-19T15:46:29Z")
When I created the earth … ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/10 "2010-08-19T16:11:07Z")
As I mentioned in the previous thread on this topic: > [@Fake Marine in full uniform at his High School reunion is found out by classmate & arrested With pic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fake-marine-in-full-uniform-at-his-high-school-reunion-is-found-out-by-classmate-arrested-with-pic/517292/54): > > …There are two different federal offenses that are being conflated here: impersonating a member of the military and wearing unearned awards. > > While I strongly think that both of these deceptions should be against the law (which is currently the case), if we are going to discuss the merits of the laws in question, it would be helpful to discuss the two issues separately. > > Allowing people to impersonate members of our Armed Forces could have real national security implications. Just like we have laws prohibiting someone from impersonating a police officer, we have laws prohibiting people from impersonating members of the military. I would think it would be obvious why allowing this (which is what decriminalization equates to) is a bad idea. Marine Corps officer command Marines. U.S. Marines guard the President, military installations, embassies, nuclear weapons, etc. It is a really bad idea to allow fake Marine officers to be running around with impunity. > > The other issue is that of wearing unearned medals. This is less of a case of having national security implications and more of a “stolen valor” issue. While I also think that this should be illegal, I will admit that this is somewhat of an emotional reaction. Allowing people to wear unearned medals debases the awards in question, just like counterfeit money debases currency. The dismissed cases linked to in the OP are even further down the scale, IMHO–in that you simply have people who falsely claimed to have been a veteran, or to falsely claimed to have served in a particular conflict, or to have falsely received a medal, or some combination thereof. I can see that making a false claim for something that occurred in the past might indeed be protected speech, for all the reasons that have been discussed. I would have more of problem with someone falsely claiming to be an active-duty servicemember, and would take the most issue with someone actually putting on the uniform of an active-duty servicemember and impersonating a servicemember–like the fake Marine discussed in the earlier thread. In my mind, these actions are little different from someone falsely claiming to be a police officer, or more seriously, actually putting on a police uniform and impersonating a police officer. As one of the articles linked to in the OP states: > [@](#): > > Military fakers across the country have been prosecuted under the act, but Strandlof’s case and the prosecution of Xavier Alvarez in the Central District of California are the only cases based on speech alone. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/11 "2010-08-19T16:23:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, as I told Bill Brennan when I was helping him write the Texas v. Johnson decision, someday you’re going to regret this overbreadth freedom. But Bill was just a headstrong kinda guy. Is this an example of stolen valour on the part of our learned friend **Bricker**? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/12 "2010-08-19T16:25:08Z")
I just finished the test run for my time machine. Went back to six BCE and totally nailed some teen-slut in Nazareth. Good times. But my hobby of high-energy physics can wait, I’ve got to return to duty as an Ultra-Violet Level Clearance Navy Seal to continue my ongoing mission, killing the people who uncover the \*truth \*about 911. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/13 "2010-08-19T16:32:26Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I just finished the test run for my time machine. Went back to six BCE and totally nailed some teen-slut in Nazareth. Dad? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/14 "2010-08-19T16:33:19Z")
[“I was born about ten thousand years ago, There ain’t nothin’ in this world that I don’t know. I saw Peter, Paul and Moses playing ring around the roses And I’ll whup the man who says it isn’t so.”](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLMI3JuuwQA) ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/15 "2010-08-19T16:35:35Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > I just finished the test run for my time machine. Went back to six BCE and totally nailed some teen-slut in Nazareth. > > Dad? Uh… I am that I am. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/16 "2010-08-19T16:42:29Z")
> [@robby](#): > > I would have more of problem with someone falsely claiming to be an active-duty servicemember, and would take the most issue with someone actually putting on the uniform of an active-duty servicemember and impersonating a servicemember–like the fake Marine discussed in the earlier thread. In my mind, these actions are little different from someone falsely claiming to be a police officer, or more seriously, actually putting on a police uniform and impersonating a police officer. While facially similar, the two situations are different in some pretty important ways. Police officers have authority to act differently to non-police officers in everyday life. Members of the military in general don’t, at least not in ways that affect people on a day to day basis. Pretending to be a police officer has a much greater potential to cause harm, such as a person wasting time reporting a crime, for example. I’d be willing to bet that someone impersonating a military member around a nuclear facility, for example, would already be prosecutable under existing laws. I don’t think you can justify the law under a public interest/protection standard, and it seems to be another part of the fetishization of military service. It strikes me as odd that claiming to have received a Nobel Prize for Medicine for curing AIDS is not prosecutable, but claiming to have spent three months drinking at Naval Station Great Lakes, protecting against the Canadian hordes, and drinking until receiving a dishonorable discharge would be. The same situation can be seen with the protesting at funerals situation - no one in power gave a crap about Matthew Shephard’s funderal being picketed by fundies, but as soon as veterans became involved, it was cause for legislation… Now, that doesn’t make it unconstitutional of course. I wasn’t under the impression that deliberate falsehoods (outside of political campaigns and satire) had any degree of protection. I guess I need to read the opinion and see what they based this on. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/17 "2010-08-19T17:37:18Z")
> [@villa](#): > > > [@robby](#): > > > > I would have more of problem with someone falsely claiming to be an active-duty servicemember, and would take the most issue with someone actually putting on the uniform of an active-duty servicemember and impersonating a servicemember–like the fake Marine discussed in the earlier thread. In my mind, these actions are little different from someone falsely claiming to be a police officer, or more seriously, actually putting on a police uniform and impersonating a police officer. > > While facially similar, the two situations are different in some pretty important ways. Police officers have authority to act differently to non-police officers in everyday life. Members of the military in general don’t, at least not in ways that affect people on a day to day basis. Pretending to be a police officer has a much greater potential to cause harm, such as a person wasting time reporting a crime, for example. I’d be willing to bet that someone impersonating a military member around a nuclear facility, for example, would already be prosecutable under existing laws. I think it would be difficult to write laws outlining exactly it would be permissable to impersonate an active-duty service member. Should it only be illegal if a state of martial law exists, for example? I don’t think it’s an overreach of government authority to prohibit impersonating an active-duty member of the country’s armed forces in all cases. > [@villa](#): > > I don’t think you can justify the law under a public interest/protection standard… I disagree, for reasons I’ve mentioned previously. > [@villa](#): > > …and it seems to be another part of the fetishization of military service. :rolleyes: That’s a bit inflammatory, isn’t it? > [@villa](#): > > …It strikes me as odd that claiming to have received a Nobel Prize for Medicine for curing AIDS is not prosecutable, but claiming to have spent three months drinking at Naval Station Great Lakes, protecting against the Canadian hordes, and drinking until receiving a dishonorable discharge would be. Well, now you’ve shifted gears and are back to talking about someone lying about past service. I’ve already agreed, and so have a couple of federal judges, that this is probably protected speech (though I think that it is reprehensible conduct). ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/18 "2010-08-19T17:45:33Z")
> [@robby](#): > > I think it would be difficult to write laws outlining exactly it would be permissable to impersonate an active-duty service member. Should it only be illegal if a state of martial law exists, for example? I don’t think it’s an overreach of government authority to prohibit impersonating an active-duty member of the country’s armed forces in all cases. I never said it was an overreach. I specifically later said I wasn’t sure if it was unconstitutional. But if you want to criminalize something, I think it is incumbent on you to provide a reason. I noted there was a reason for criminalizing impersonating a police officer. Can you think of an actual, reasonably common situation, in which harm is caused by impersonating a member of the military, that isn’t already illegal? I’m pretty certain if you dressed up in military uniform and tried to get into a nuclear facility, for example, you’d be committing some kind of crime other than the impersonation. > [@robby](#): > > I disagree, for reasons I’ve mentioned previously. But you didn’t provide a realistic example of the harm impersonating a member of the military can cause. Again that isn’t already illegal. > [@robby](#): > > :rolleyes: That’s a bit inflammatory, isn’t it? Not really. We do fetishize military service. I have respect for those who serve in the military, but I don’t think it automatically makes a person a saint. > [@robby](#): > > Well, now you’ve shifted gears and are back to talking about someone lying about past service. I’ve already agreed, and so have a couple of federal judges, that this is probably protected speech (though I think that it is reprehensible conduct). OK - change it to a person claiming to have won the Nobel Prize for curing AIDS and a person currently serving at Naval Station Great Lakes. Same difference. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/19 "2010-08-19T19:06:24Z")
> [@villa](#): > > claiming to have received a Nobel Prize for Medicine for curing AIDS is not prosecutable… But OTOH claiming to be a physician and _currently_ giving people medical treatment without actually having the degree or license IS prosecutable. I could see the logic in outlawing (misdemeanor and fine only level) a deliberate effort to impersonate a military or civil official in a context where it could lead others to assume you are vested with the authority or perquisites of the office. True, it is only upon you actually exercising the misappropriation of authority/perks that it really becomes a burden on society, but it seems to me it would not be nuts to make Step 1 in the process also an offense, just so you are well warned to NOT take the next step. Of course, in my case I **am** a Colonel, with a commission… … signed by the governor of Kentucky, for social-event purposes 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721/20 "2010-08-19T19:54:40Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Dad? > > Uh… I am that I am. Popeye? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stolen-valor-act-ruled-unconstitutional/550721.md?page=2)