Stolen Valor Fight Heats Up As VSO's And States Enter The Fray

Editor's Note: Since the original publication of this article, the U.S. Supreme Court was scheduled to hear this case on Wednesday, February 22, 2012.

Since October, when the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would be reviewing the constitutionality of the 2005 Stolen Valor Act, Veterans Service Organizations and many States have been preparing legal briefs to challenge those seeking to overturn the Act, with most of it coming to a head last month.

The case tests the reach of First Amendment free-speech protection for false statements, including those about personal military feats. Government lawyers, who have appealed a decision invalidating the law, emphasize that medals "express the nation's gratitude for the patriotism and courage," and they contend that false claims of having received military awards dilute their meaning.

Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli says that the act was enacted to deter false claims about receiving a medal. “The government has a strong – and indeed, compelling — interest in protecting the reputation and integrity of its military honor system against knowingly false claims, ” Verrilli argues in court papers, ABC News obtained and reported, “and the act appropriately accommodates that interest and First Amendment concerns because it provides ample breathing room for protected speech.”

Twenty five military and veterans service organizations, led by the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), subsequently filed a brief last month seeking to overturn the California appellate court finding the Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional.

“Whether a person is masquerading as a decorated general at a veterans’ celebration or a braggart whose false claims of receiving prestigious decorations move a neighbor to write a school essay about him entitled The Hero Next Door, lies about military honors take advantage of the public’s trust. They allow con men to benefit in innumerable tangible and intangible ways from the virtually inexhaustible reservoir of goodwill, admiration and honor that military heroes have earned over the past 235 years,” the brief says, which was reported by the Air Force Times.

STOLEN VALOR ACT: CASE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT
The case involves Xavier Alvarez, an elected member of a California water board. At a 2007 water board meeting, Alvarez fraudulently introduced himself to the public as a retired, 25-year U.S. Marine Corps veteran who won the Congressional Medal of Honor – the nation’s highest military decoration. However, Alvarez never received the Medal of Honor and never served in the military. He was convicted on two counts of violating the Stolen Valor Act and was sentenced to three years probation, a fine, and 416 hours of community service. He appealed his conviction to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California. The Court ruled the Stolen Valor Act was “facially invalid” because the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution generally protects false speech, including lying about having earned military decorations and honors.

“It is vitally important to preserve the integrity of the system recognizing military valor and the sacrifices our service members make for their country,” stated MOAA President Vice Adm. Norb Ryan said announcing MOAA’s role in the brief.

The organization also claims the goodwill and prestige associated with American military awards for their own benefit is being stolen through these fraudulent statements of service. “No one should be allowed to steal what our veterans have rightfully earned through their service and sacrifice.”

STATES GET INVOLVED
Separately, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the lower-court ruling that struck down the Stolen Valor Act. Abbott’s brief, joined by attorneys general from 19 other states, argued that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals erroneously struck down the federal law for infringing on the First Amendment right to free speech.

“Military honors confer well-deserved recognition and prestige to the brave men and women who serve in our nation’s armed forces,” Attorney General Abbott said. “Congress enacted the Stolen Valor Act to prevent imposters from making false statements that diminish the value of awards and honors that legitimate heroes receive in recognition of their sacrifices for our country. Today we are supporting our men and women in uniform – and our nation’s veterans – by asking the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s legally flawed ruling.”

In his brief, Abbott argued that the 2005 law properly prohibits a narrow category of knowingly false claims - lies that undermine the value and prestige of military awards. “Lies about unearned credentials serve only to cloak the speaker in an unwarranted credibility and frustrate the pursuit of truth,” Abbott wrote.

The court plans to hear the case of United States v. Alvarez in early 2012 and rule by summer, the L.A. Times reported.