Reuters: U.S.: Top court strikes down military medal lying law

Reuters: U.S. Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com

Top court strikes down military medal lying law Jun 28th 2012, 14:10 By James Vicini WASHINGTON | Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:10am EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a federal law that makes it a crime to lie about receiving a military medal, ruling it violated constitutional free-speech rights. By a 6-3 vote in a case about how far the government may go to prosecute false claims about military honors, the high court handed a setback to the Obama administration over the "Stolen Valor Act" adopted by Congress in 2006. Administration attorneys had defended the military medal law as constitutional and said the government has a strong interest in protecting the integrity of awards to war heroes. Opponents said the law swept too broadly, suppressed speech and covered innocent bragging, satire and even false statements that cause no harm such as those at issue in the case by a serial liar who held local political office in California. The military medal law targeted people who falsely claimed, verbally or in writing, that they received such an award. Violators could face up to six months in prison, or up to one year for elite awards, including the Medal of Honor. The case involved Xavier Alvarez, who was elected to a California water board in Pomona. He introduced himself at a board meeting in 2007 and said he was a retired Marine who won the Medal of Honor, the country's highest military decoration. Alvarez never received the award and never served in the military. The FBI got a recording of the meeting and Alvarez became one of the first people prosecuted under the law. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to pay a $5,000 fine and perform more than 400 hours of community service at a veterans' hospital. He then challenged the law for violating his free-speech rights and a U.S. appeals court ruled in his favor. (Reporting By James Vicini; Editing by Will Dunham) Link this Share this Digg this Email Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com. If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions