Don't lie about being a war hero, court says

January 30, 2012

Denver, Colorado: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, on January 27, 2012, upheld a federal law that prohibits citizens from making false claims about being a war hero. The Stolen Valor Act, which was passed in 2006 to stop military impostors, is under scrutiny as to whether or not it violates the First Amendment. Judges Timothy Tymkovich and Bobby Baldock explained in the ruling, "As the Supreme Court has observed time and again, false statements of fact do not enjoy constitutional protection, except to the extent necessary to protect more valuable speech. Under this principle, the Stolen Valor Act does not impinge on or chill protected speech, and therefore does not offend the First Amendment." Judge Jerome Holmes dissented. The U.S. Supreme Court will make the final decision about the constitutionality of the law in October.

The case revolves around Rick Strandlof, who was arrested for claiming that he was wounded in Iraq as a Marine and received the Purple Heart and Silver Star medals. These claims were found to be false. In 2009, a district judge dismissed the case on the basis of free speech. The most recent ruling from the 10th Circuit reverses that judge's decision. There have been similar cases in California, Georgia and Missouri.

Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear the case of Californian Xavier Alvarez, who claimed to be a retired Marine and recipient of the Medal of Honor, even though he has never served in the military. In their ruling on the Alvarez case, the judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found the Stolen Valor Act to be unconstitutional.