Court: You Can Tell Lies About Being a War Hero

By EVAN PEREZ

WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court cited First Amendment free-speech rights in striking down a law that made it a federal crime to falsely claim to have been awarded military medals.

The 6-3 majority opinion upheld a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that had declared unconstitutional the Stolen Valor Act, a 2006 statute Congress passed "to protect the reputation and meaning" of military honors.

Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said, "Permitting the government to decree this speech to be a criminal offense, whether shouted from the rooftops or made in a barely audible whisper, would endorse government authority to compile a list of subjects about which false statements are punishable."

The case centered on Xavier Alvarez, a water-district board member in California, who was convicted of falsely claiming to be a Medal of Honor recipient.

A federal appeals court threw out the conviction, finding that the First Amendment didn't envision a "powerful government" policing everyone's speech for "worthless, offensive, and demonstrable untruths."

Justice Kennedy read the majority opinion on behalf of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor. They were joined in a concurring opinion by Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, who said Congress could craft a more narrowly tailored statute that may pass constitutional muster.

"The mere potential for the exercise of that power casts a chill, a chill the First Amendment cannot permit if free speech, thought, and discourse are to remain the foundation of our freedom," Justice Kennedy added.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, on behalf of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, arguing that by striking down the law the court was shielding lies and breaking from precedents that regarded false statements as not protected by free-speech rights.

"The Stolen Valor Act is a narrow law enacted to address an important problem, and it presents no threat to freedom of expression," Justice Alito wrote.

At oral arguments in February, the justices said they were sympathetic to protecting the valor represented by U.S. military decorations, but questioned whether falsely claiming to have received a medal should be a federal offense.

Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told the justices the law was a "targeted statute that's designed to deal with a particular" problem: "the misappropriation of the government-conferred honor and esteem" that such a decoration represents. The law didn't criminalize all lying, just "a calculated, factual falsehood" about oneself, said Mr. Verrilli.

"Well, where do you stop?" said Chief Justice Roberts. who noted Congress could have an interest in ensuring truthful representations about many personal facts.

The statement that led to Mr. Alvarez's arrest came at a 2007 meeting of a local water district board, where he served as an elected member. "I'm a retired Marine of 25 years," he said, adding, "Back in 1987, I was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. I got wounded many times by the same guy." Mr. Alvarez's lawyer acknowledged the statements were false.

After his conviction, Mr. Alvarez was sentenced to three years of probation, 416 hours of community service and a $5,000 fine under the Stolen Valor Act.

Mr. Alvarez made many other false claims. A lower court observed that he lived in "a make-believe world" where he once "played hockey for the Detroit Red Wings" and rescued "the American ambassador during the Iranian hostage crisis." and "secretly married…a Mexican starlet."

Jonathan Libby, a public defender representing Mr. Alvarez, said at oral arguments that while his client's lies may be contemptible, the harm they caused was too "diffuse" to punish with a criminal conviction.

"Mr. Alvarez, whether or not he in fact was sentenced to a crime, he still was exposed for who he was, which was a liar," he noted.

The majority of justices echoed that sentiment, saying the way to respond to false statements is to challenge it with truth.

Some lawmakers have sought to pass a new law that would narrowly define the criminal offense to apply to those who receive a benefit by lying about military honors.

Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, was among more than 20 news organizations that filed a friend of the court brief contending that the Stolen Valor Act violates the First Amendment.

Write to Evan Perez at evan.perez@wsj.com

A version of this article appeared June 29, 2012, on page A2 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Court Says You Can Lie About Being a War Hero.