Six Justices of the Supreme Court kicked the ball back to the court of Congress and the Defense Department to save stolen honor. The six Justices' decision this morning holds that the Stolen Valor Act exceeds the bounds of permissible government restrictions on speech. The decision is here. The six Justices, however, lay out how Congress may rewrite the Stolen Valor Act to make it acceptable to the Court and to strengthen the ability to expose frauds.
As I wrote “Hollywood cares more for its vets than the Defense Department”, that one can go online to find every Academy Award winner but the Defense Department has avoided creating a database for the public to know who really received medals for valor. In this respect, four of the Justices agree that the Defense Department should have such a public database, “the Government could likely protect the integrity of the military awards system by creating a database of Medal winners accessible and searchable on the Internet, as some private individuals have already done.” Otherwise, the Court holds that a reworked law should have a more direct causal connection between the false presentation of self as a bemedaled military hero and the harm done, rather than a presumptive harm to the military or real medal recipients.
Although there are many statutes and common-law doctrines making the utterance of certain kinds of false statements unlawful, they tend to be narrower than the Act, in that they limit the scope of their application in various ways, for example, by requiring proof of specific harm to identifiable victims. The Act lacks any such limiting features. Although it prohibits only knowing and intentional falsehoodsabout readily verifiable facts within the personal knowledge of thespeaker, it otherwise ranges broadly, and that breadth means that itcreates a significant risk of First Amendment harm.
Basically, the majority of the Supreme Court held against broadening the power of the federal government to define Stolen Honor as one of the categories of speech that is beyond the protection of the First Amendment. Four of the Justices found that the precedents in other cases that found exceptions do not directly apply to Stolen Honor and refused to set Stolen Honor as a new exception. “…the First Amendment requires that there be a direct causal link between the restriction imposed and the injury to be prevented.” Two other Justices concurred, finding a more specific Stolen Valor Act would be acceptable: “It may, however, be possible substantially to achieve the Government’s objective in less burdensome ways. The First Amendment risks flowing from the Act’s breadth of coverage could be diminished or eliminated by a more finely tailored statute, for example, a statute that requires a showing that the false statement caused specific harm or is focused on lies more likely to be harmful or on contexts where such lies are likely to cause harm.”
I'll likely have more to add later, so click back. Hopefully, Congress and the Defense Department will act to save stolen honor. The House had voted for the Stolen Valor Act by unanimous acclamation. The hundreds of frauds who cover themselves with honor they are not due do so to gain rewards and do devalue the sacrifices of those who earned the nation's honor. It shouldn't and better not be difficult for the Congress and the Defense Department to quickly get their acts together. Millions of real veterans and patriotic Americans are watching.
John Lilyea, stalwart exposer of medal impersonators, points us to a bill in Congress that may work. Otherwise, as one wiseguy blogger says, " I got some phony medals to order!"
The news pales before the Obamacare decisions, except for veterans and other Americans who actually honor medal recipients. Here's more at the Washington Post.
