Lies are protected free speech?
The 9th circus again:
"A three-year-old federal law that makes it a crime to falsely claim to have received a medal from the U.S. military is unconstitutional, an appeals court panel in California ruled Tuesday.
The decision involves the case of Xavier Alvarez of Pomona, Calif., a water district board member who said at a public meeting in 2007 that he was a retired Marine who received the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military decoration.
Alvarez was indicted in 2007. He pleaded guilty on condition that he be allowed to appeal on First Amendment grounds. He was sentenced under the Stolen Valor Act to more than 400 hours of community service at a veterans hospital and fined $5,000.
A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with him in a 2-1 decision Tuesday, agreeing that the law was a violation of his free-speech rights. The majority said there's no evidence that such lies harm anybody, and there's no compelling reason for the government to ban such lies.
The dissenting justice insisted that the majority refused to follow clear Supreme Court precedent that false statements of fact are not entitled to First Amendment protection.
Source
5 comments:
Apparently, the 9th Circus is now telling us that false claims are legal. So what does that do to the so-called Truth in Advertising laws? (not that there is any)
Not to quarrel with things immaterial, but I get tired of the little errors that are pervasive in journalism these days. These are things that could be cured quite simply, like calling an appellate court judge a "justice," a term reserved only for Supreme Court members.
As for the prior comment, courts of appeals have taken to making fact-based decisions that give little guidance to those on the ground. I would take this case as an example. They decided that "stolen valor" constitutes a harmless lie, while they will probably conclude that false advertising causes actual harm (without recognizing the striking similarities, particularly in diluting the heroic acts required to legitimately receive such valor.)
In the mean time, the factual nuances cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation expenses while the facts are hashed out.
QUOTABLE QUOTES
"It is no coincidence that those who imagine themselves so much wiser and nobler than the rest of us should be at the forefront of those who seek to erode constitutional restrictions on the arbitrary powers of government. How can our betters impose their superior wisdom and virtue on us, when the Constitution gets in the way at every turn, with all its provisions to safeguard a system based on a self-governing people? To get their way, the elites must erode or dismantle the Constitution, bit by bit, in one way or another. What that means is that they must dismantle America. This has been going on piecemeal over the years, but now we have an administration in Washington that circumvents the Constitution wholesale, with its laws passed so fast that the public cannot know what is in them..."
– Thomas Sowell
If misrepresenting yourself, and lying to large groups of people, was not protected speech, then all national elected officials would be breaking the law.
Man, this is just so cool! This gives me license to now claim that I'm an unemployed single black woman with 8 kids. I can't wait for the checks to come rolling in! Better yet, I'll also claim "undocumented" status, and my health care will be free! Gotta love this country!
-sig
Post a Comment