Washington \u2022 Is there value in a lie? <\/p>\n
That\u2019s a question the Supreme Court weighed on Wednesday as it took up the case of a California man who was charged with a crime for lying about receiving the Medal of Honor. <\/p>\n
Xavier Alvarez falsely claimed that he was a Marine who earned the nation\u2019s top award, but the question of whether such a deceit warrants prosecution and jail time \u2014 or has value and deserves protection under the First Amendment \u2014 is now up to the nation\u2019s high court. <\/p>\n
The case could have direct repercussions for a Utah County veteran, Myron Brown, who is also accused of lying about earning the Distinguished Service Cross, the Silver Star and the Purple Heart during his service in the Korean War. <\/p>\n
In Brown\u2019s case, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, presented the Provo resident with medals during a ceremony last year that was covered by the Deseret News, the Daily Herald of Provo and KSL-TV. Saying he was duped, Chaffetz last month turned over his own investigation into the matter to federal prosecutors and said he\u2019ll convene a congressional hearing on the matter. <\/p>\n
The actions came more than a month after The Salt Lake Tribune first reported Brown, 86, presented fraudulent documents awarding him the medals. Brown denies any wrongdoing. <\/p>\n
Justices in the Alvarez case on Wednesday were skeptical of the Stolen Valor Act passed by Congress in 2006 that criminalizes false claims of military medals, and feared that making it unlawful to lie could stifle free speech permanently. <\/p>\n
Justice Stephen Breyer noted that if it\u2019s illegal to lie about a military medal, then political rhetoric could soon be criminalized. <\/p>\n
Story continues below <\/p>\n
\"And then if this [law] is lawful and constitutional, then you have people in political campaigns suddenly worrying that the U.S. attorney is going to come in and start indicting him,\" Breyer told Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. <\/p>\n
\"That\u2019s part of the chilling effect,\" Breyer said. \"And you\u2019ve assumed you can get around this chilling effect, but I\u2019m less certain.\" <\/p>\n
Justice Anthony Kennedy disagreed with Verrilli\u2019s argument that there is no intrinsic value in a lie and therefore it has no need for First Amendment free-speech protection. <\/p>\n
\"I think it\u2019s a sweeping proposition to say that there\u2019s no value to falsity,\" Kennedy said. \"Falsity is a way in which we contrast what is false and what is true.\" <\/p>\n
Verrilli countered that the high court has often ruled that lies \u2014 such as perjury or fraud \u2014 have no protection as free speech and that in this case, the government can easily prove when someone is falsely claiming to have been awarded a medal. <\/p>\n
\"The Stolen Valor Act regulates a very narrowly drawn and specific category of calculated factual falsehood, a verifiably false claim that an individual has won a military honor,\" Verrilli said. <\/p>\n
Justice Antonin Scalia agreed. <\/p>\n
\"I believe that there is no First Amendment value in \u2014 in falsehood,\" he said, noting that lying about military service does harm to those who actually did serve and were awarded medals for their heroism. <\/p>\n
Next Page \u00bb<\/p>\n
The rest is here: Washington \u2022 Is there value in a lie? That\u2019s a question the Supreme Court weighed on Wednesday as it took up the case of a California man who was charged with a crime for lying about receiving the Medal of Honor Continue reading
\nSupreme Court: Is a lie protected by free speech?<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"