Posted on 07/16/2010 11:24:45 AM PDT by george76
A federal judge in Denver has ruled the Stolen Valor Act is "facially unconstitutional" because it violates free speech and dismissed the criminal case against Rick Strandlof, a man who lied about being an Iraq war veteran.
"The Stolen Valor Act is declared to be facially unconstitutional as a content-based restriction on speech that does not serve a compelling government interest, and consequently that the Act is invalid as violative of the First Amendment," Blackburn wrote in his opinion.
Strandlof, 32, was charged with five misdemeanors related to violating the Stolen Valor Act - specifically, making false claims about receiving military decorations.
He posed as "Rick Duncan," a wounded Marine captain who received a Purple Heart and a Silver Star. Strandlof used that persona to found the Colorado Veterans Alliance and solicit funds for the organization.
the ACLU of Colorado and the Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties group, all filed briefs with Blackburn contesting the Stolen Valor Act.
They argued that simply lying is not illegal.
The Stolen Valor Act prohibits people from falsely claiming they have been awarded military decorations and medals.
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
Or maybe soon some idiot judge will rule laws against impersonating an officer of the law to be unConstitutional? The list of ridiculous claims that could be made now due to this outrageous precedent could be endless.
I disagree with the ruling because free speech does not protect fraud. He lied about being a soldier and receiving the medals/awards just so he could solicit funds and defraud people of money.
So I guess all the laws that prohibit a person from pretending to be a judge, an attorney, a congressman, or a cop, for the purpose of soliciting funds and/or benefits should also be struck down??
Fraud is fraud and should be illegal.
If anyone can claim to be the recipient of an honor they didn’t receive it would lower morale and effect the efficiency of the armed services.
And the same can be said for those who claimed to have been in the military, and made up stories of atrocities. You will find such people hanging out with Code Pink, UFPJ, and ANSWER types.
The damage to the reputation and morale of the military, the damage to the integrity of the award and the award recipients is more than sufficient
Another reason to hate lawyers, and the Judges they become.
The Stolen Valor law isn't about cheapening military awards and decorations. If they were most VFW and DAV halls would be empty.
They are about prevent fraud. Military service, particularly valorous service, rewards individuals with tangible results. The higher the award the more the rewards. Otherwise your liars would stop at being a discharged junior sergeant or junior officer.
Look at politicians of all strips that have lied about their service from a disabled Congressman who was disabled by his own weapons to people who have never served. Why?
The did it to fraudulently convince us that they were more qualified to hold office.
The article failed to mention what benefits the defendant had applied for based on his lies. That is was the US Attorney should have focused on - tangible fraud not an abstract concept. That would have made it much tougher for the Judge to issue his rulings.
5.56mm
Anything I say would get me banned.
I guess all those impersonating a government official statutes are unconstitutional as well./s
“An element of fraud is knowingly and intentionally making false representations. Is fraud now protected speech too?”
Nope. A much easier claim against this guy would have been wire fraud -— soliciting money with a lie.
This decision is consistent with the original intent of the Constitution and the prohibition against the government infringing upon speech.
I agree with the ruling. We have laws to prosecute fraud. If he committed criminal and civil fraud, use those laws.
“While falsely claiming to be a military hero is despicable, I don’t think it should be illegal.”
Good point; we do have someone masquerading as Commander In Chief.
Is contempt of court now an unconstitutional restriction on speech?
How about the leftard scumbags on the US Supreme Court who just struck down Chicago’s anti-gun ordinance? Were you pretty upset to see the federal courts being used to strike down a “duly enacted law”?
“Stealing valor” is generally for a purpose. They are running some confidence game....whether for money, position, political advantage, etc.
Isn’t “conning” people illegal?
So my point is that you might be able to say what you want, but lying as part of a way to steal some benefit from others is not protected.
Damages have to be specific as to a particlar individual. If what you claim was to be true; criticizing Obama could be a crime. Don’t think you want to go there.
This will be appealed, right?
Somebody needs to smack down that sick scumbag judge Blackburn.
The appropriate punishment for this guy is public ridicule and shunning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.