Freedom To Lie

A recent Supreme Court ruling gives everyone the freedom under the First Amendment to claim they have been awarded military medals. To me, this says the Supreme Court has ruled it is legal to lie. There should no longer be laws against saying you are a policeman, FBI agent, CIA agent, Supreme Court Justice, member of Congress or anything else you choose. The First Amendment grants freedom of speech and this ruling grants freedom to lie. A lie is a lie no matter the content of the false claim.

The full transcript of this decision is on the Supreme Court web site. See link below. In the ALITO, J., dissenting opinion, Justice Alito states:

“Content-based restrictions on speech have been permitted only for a few historic categories of speech, including incitement, obscenity, defamation, speech integral to criminal conduct, so-called ‘fighting words,’ child pornography, fraud, true threats, and speech presenting some grave and imminent threat the Government has the power to prevent. … Absent from these few categories is any general exception for false statements. … These prior decisions have not confronted a measure, like the Stolen Valor Act, that targets falsity and nothing more.”

Falsely declaring you have earned the Medal of Honor to receive money from the government, get a job, receive tickets to sporting and other events or be elected to office obviously is no longer fraud.

“Congress long ago made it a federal offense for anyone to wear, manufacture, or sell certain military decorations without authorization. See Act of Feb. 24, 1923, ch. 110, 42 Stat. 1286 (codified as amended at 18 U. S. C. §704(a)). … Individuals often falsely represent themselves as award recipients in order to obtain financial or other material rewards, such as lucrative contracts and government benefits.10      An investigation of false claims in a single region of the United States, for example, revealed that 12 men had defrauded the Department of Veterans Affairs out of more than $1.4 million in veteran’s benefits.”

I guess since Stolen Valor has now been declared a violation of the First Amendment, this is no longer punishable. Wearing an undeserved medal is legal  but selling those decorations without authorization is still a federal offense. Would that be because the government cannot gain revenue from the lie but it can from merchandise?

“Even when considering some instances of defamation or fraud, the Court has instructed that falsity alone may not suffice to bring the speech outside the First Amendment; the statement must be a knowing and reckless falsehood.” The 12 men who defrauded the veteran’s benefits knowingly and recklessly lied to receive those benefits but the new ruling allows the First Amendment to protect them. Any person who commits Stolen Valor must knowingly and recklessly lie since they know the allegations are not true. “Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U. S. 64, 75 (1964) (“[T]he knowingly false statement and the false statement made with reckless disregard of the truth, do not enjoy constitutional protection”). Now false statements do enjoy constitutional protection.

“JUSTICE BREYER, joined by JUSTICE KAGAN, concluded that because the Stolen Valor Act, as presently drafted, works disproportionate constitutional harm, it fails intermediate scrutiny, and thus violates the First Amendment. Pp. 1−10.

(b) The Act should be read as criminalizing only false factual statements made with knowledge of their falsity and with intent that they be taken as true. Although the Court has frequently said or implied that false factual statements enjoy little First Amendment protection, see, e.g., Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U. S. 323, 340, those statements cannot be read to mean “no protection at all.” False factual statements serve useful human objectives in many contexts.”

So Stolen Valor criminalizes only false factual statements made with the knowledge they are false and intending them to be taken as true. A lie is a false factual statement made with the knowledge it is false and intending it to be taken as true BUT if that statement serves a useful purpose to you, it is now protected by the First Amendment even though time and again the Supreme Court has recognized false factual statements possess no intrinsic First Amendment value. Are we confused yet?

“All told, there are more than 100 federal criminal statutes that punish false statements made in connection with areas of federal agency concern. See United States v. Wells, 519 U. S. 482, 505507, and nn. 810 (1997) (Stevens, J., dissenting) (citing “at least 100 federal false statement statutes” in the United States Code).

These examples amply demonstrate that false statements of fact merit no First Amendment protection in their own right.”

… as JUSTICE BREYER notes, “12      UNITED STATES v. ALVAREZ

…that many in our society either approve or condone certain discrete categories of false statements, including false statements made to prevent harm to innocent victims and so-called “white lies. … Respondent’s claim, like all those covered by the Stolen Valor Act, served no valid purpose.” Defrauding the Veteran’s Department of $1.4 million served no valid purpose in falsely claiming military honors. .”… According to respondent, his lie about the Medal of Honor was nothing out of the ordinary for 21st-century Americans. “Everyone lies,” he says. Brief for Respondent 10. “We lie all the time.” Ibid. “[H]uman beings are constantly forced to choose the persona we present to the world, and our choices nearly always involve intentional omissions and misrepresentations, if not outright deception.” Id., at 39. An academic amicus tells us that the First Amendment protects the right to construct “self-aggrandizing fabrications such as having been awarded a military decoration.” By his own words, we now know Justice Breyer condones lying.

Our government has made it clear they do not respect our military, past or present. Not only does this ruling enforce their views, it also gives them another avenue to legalize their own lies. This decision could lighten the burden on the courts because this decision could be interpreted to say there is no such thing as slander or liable. Lie against someone – that’s okay because you have freedom of speech that permits you to lie. Falsely accuse someone (other than a member of the government, of course) and fear no punishment because the First Amendment now gives you freedom to lie. The government already believes no one has the right to lie, falsely accuse or truthfully accuse them of anything and they already hold themselves above the law.

We can dispense with Bibles for swearing in because God is no longer allowed in our government or justice systems.  “Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,” can no longer be required in our courts. It is an infringement against the First Amendment right to lie. Take an oath to support and uphold the Constitution then say or do anything that breaks that oath and it is now legal under the First Amendment. Members of the government have ignored their oaths for years. Now you have the same right to lie as they do.

Sources:

http://www.kiiitv.com/story/18926253/veterans-respond-to-court-overturning-lying-law

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/01/stolen-valor-act-supreme-court-decision-_n_1641329.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/06/anger-supreme-court-ruling-on-false-military-medals.html

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-210d4e9.pdf