- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this on and see why it would be free speech? The guy not only lied about serving in the Marines, but also about receiving a Medal of Honor. I'm thinking this should be considered a criminal act similar to identity theft and/or impersonation of an officer.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/us/stolen-valor-act-argued-before-supreme-court.html
[h1]Justices Appear Open to Affirming Medal Law[/h1] [h6]By ADAM LIPTAK[/h6][h6]Published: February 22, 2012
[/h6]
WASHINGTON — Over the course of an hourlong argument on Wednesday, the Supreme Court seemed gradually to accept that it might be able to uphold a federal law that makes it a crime to lie about military honors, notwithstanding the First Amendment’s free speech guarantees. The justices were aided by suggestions from the government about how to limit the scope of a possible ruling in its favor and by significant concessions from a lawyer for the defendant.
Enlarge This Image
[img]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/23/us/SCOTUS-1/SCOTUS-1-articleInline.jpg[/img]
[h6]David Goldman/Associated Press[/h6]
An official's false claim about a Medal of Honor is at issue in a Supreme Court case.
Enlarge This Image
[img]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/23/us/SCOTUS-2/SCOTUS-2-articleInline.jpg[/img]
[h6]Therese Tran/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin[/h6]
Xavier Alvarez
The case arose from a lie told in 2007 at a public meeting by Xavier Alvarez, an elected member of the board of directors of a water district in Southern California.
“I’m a retired Marine of 25 years,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/us/stolen-valor-act-argued-before-supreme-court.html
[h1]Justices Appear Open to Affirming Medal Law[/h1] [h6]By ADAM LIPTAK[/h6][h6]Published: February 22, 2012
[/h6]
WASHINGTON — Over the course of an hourlong argument on Wednesday, the Supreme Court seemed gradually to accept that it might be able to uphold a federal law that makes it a crime to lie about military honors, notwithstanding the First Amendment’s free speech guarantees. The justices were aided by suggestions from the government about how to limit the scope of a possible ruling in its favor and by significant concessions from a lawyer for the defendant.
Enlarge This Image
[img]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/23/us/SCOTUS-1/SCOTUS-1-articleInline.jpg[/img]
[h6]David Goldman/Associated Press[/h6]
An official's false claim about a Medal of Honor is at issue in a Supreme Court case.
Enlarge This Image
[img]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/02/23/us/SCOTUS-2/SCOTUS-2-articleInline.jpg[/img]
[h6]Therese Tran/Inland Valley Daily Bulletin[/h6]
Xavier Alvarez
The case arose from a lie told in 2007 at a public meeting by Xavier Alvarez, an elected member of the board of directors of a water district in Southern California.
“I’m a retired Marine of 25 years,