Lying is protected by free speech? What a crock.

Excuse me for a moment while I put my unearned Congressional Medal of Honor on and run for public office. The abject, immoral stupiditdy of our court and elected officials knows no bounds. I hope ALL of the folks that at back-slapping themselves over this decision are someday catching bullets in combat, seeing their buddies blown to pieces, and learning the hard way what VALOR really is! These friggin decisions make it hard to respect anything in this nation. Enough friggin said.

The first one I encounter will get more than verbal hell!

CMH's are pretty easy to verify. Nobody googled that claim?

Alvarez wasn’t accused of fraud, only of false speech.

Alvarez IS a fraud:

Is Alvarez Latino for Richard?

So long as no one gets hurt and no property is lost, you can't say someone's hurt feelings is a punishable crime.

The founding fathers must be rolling in their graves, 1st Amendment twisted to allow lying.

There are already thousands of posers out on street corners, claiming to be homeless veterans, begging for money. If anything, this ruling will add a few more.

No, being a jerk and liar, isnt against the law. I served. I dont think the gutless should be able to benefit from it. Those bleeding hearts, Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas dont know what they are talking about

.

Journal- People with honor comp these frauds every day because we have strong feelings of gratitude for people whom risked their lives to preserve this country. A few examples for you:

Free food for veteran, free nights stay at hotels, discounts at attractions, discounts anywhere for veterans, etc. etc. etc. If I was selling a house and a decorated vet were to say that they needed $10,000 less to be able to buy it I'd likely drop it for them out of respect. So yes, there are costs, crimes and losses.

We appreciate their efforts and respect thier valor. Many feel so strongly that they give from themselves to show additional respect for the military. That's the issue.

What do y'all mean, "allow lying?" Here in America, the government does not "allow" us to do things. We allow the Government to do certain things, and by common consent we collectively disallow certain things, by the mechanism of government. This is a far cry from receiving approval for each and every little act. I think this guy should have been prosecuted for fraud, and certainly needs to get punched in the face several times, but he didn't break the law. People run around all day pretending to be Jesus: not illegal. People in this country extract loads of cash from others by making claims about (lying about) God.

The "allow lying" thing stuck in my craw. America is not (yet) a fascist state.

As a veteran, I would never think to say I was awarded a medal that I did not. As an American, I would never respect a person who stated that they received a medal that they did not or that they never served.

Now, as a Veteran and defender of the Constitution, this decision, however we personally feel, is correct. Speech is SPEECH. The 1st Amendment gives us the right to scream, yell, holler, or whisper whatever we want. Truthful or not. I would think the Faux Propaganda channel would be proof that we allow people to say what ever they want.

As a veteran, I would never think to say I was awarded a medal that I did not. As an American, I would never respect a person who stated that they received a medal that they did not or that they never served.

Now, as a Veteran and defender of the Constitution, this decision, however we personally feel, is correct. Speech is SPEECH. The 1st Amendment gives us the right to scream, yell, holler, or whisper whatever we want. Truthful or not. I would think the Faux Propaganda channel would be proof that we allow people to say what ever they want.

"If I was selling a house and a decorated vet were to say that they needed $10,000 less to be able to buy it I'd likely drop it for them out of respect. So yes, there are costs, crimes and losses."

Maybe you can start verifying their claims before giving them $10,000?

You probably also missed this part, the government "should encourage counter-speech or legislate against actual fraud"

So don't worry the law will be back rewritten to call doing it fraud which is just what these people are doing. .

I am with FrankG912. I am also a veteran, and I believe this is the right ruling. Just boasting is one thing, and protected, but saying it and trying to get something out of it, is another thing (fraud).

I also would not lie to inflate my exploits, and to make things up like that are pretty low, but I would not criminalize it either.

By the way, do you know how to tell someone is lying about winning the Congressional Medal of Honor? First, you don't "win" it, you are awarded it, and second, it is the Medal of Honor, not the "Congressional Medal of Honor".

"...at a public water district board meeting that he was a retired Marine, had been “wounded many times,” and had been “awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor” in 1987."

One has to wonder if this guy was drunk during the meeting. You can't prevent stupid any more than you can prevent lying. But, you do have to protect the stupid lair's right to be both stupid and lying.

Initially, I was shocked by the ruling. But then I thought: What is it OK to lie about? Where to draw the line? Is it OK to lie (or stretch the truth) on your CV? Maybe freedom of speech is at that cost. I think the answer is to expose the liars, then their career is over. Limiting the freedom to lie could ultimately limit the freedom to tell the truth.

JoeNY

Read the article. No fraud was committed and no property was lost. If this guy had gone up and applied for benefits under his false claim then he could be liable for fraud. But he didn't. He was just lying through his teeth to get people to like him.

If someone gives away something just because someone claims they're a veteran, they might have a claim for damages, depending on the amount. But we already have laws for that. It's called Fraud or extorsion.

But the lying itself is not a punishable crime. It's wrong of course and we shouldn't do it, but that'snot the issue here. Lots of peopleon this forum claim they're military and then no nothing about it. Are we going to arrest them too?

So illegals lying about being Americans must be protected too?

He was never charged with fraud. That could have made the difference.

To all of those freaked out that "lying is free speech", I have to ask: except in specific and narrow circumstances, when was it NOT?? Free speech is a fundamental, abstract right; what you do with that right can be noble or disgusting. If the First Amendment only existed to protect noble speech, it wouldn't really exist at all. The furious, emotional outrage at this decision shows precisely why we need an independent judiciary; that is, to say gently to the mob, "Yes, we understand your feelings, we sympathize, we get it, but that's not going to be a factor in our decision on the constitutional merits. Sorry. Have a nice day."

Did you ever see a Mexican general's uniform. They wear more medals than there are days in the year. Just what war did those guys fight in?

Actually, you CAN NOT just go out and buy a copy of the medal of honor. I'm pretty sure those are controlled by the government. SAYING you've been awarded one and actually wearing it should be two different things. Much akin to saying you're a police officer and actually wearing a badge. If you falsely wear a badge, you can go to jail for impersonating a police officer. I can't say for sure, but I think if you actually wear the medal without having earned it, there may be a different law that applies.

Mexicans won:

World War One

World War Two

the Korean War

the Vietnam War

the American Civil War

the US-Mexican War

the Boer War

the Napoleonic War

the 100 Years War

The Battle of the Alamo( Oh yeah! They actually won that one)

The Battle of Britain

The fight over the last burrito

....etc......

if lying was illegal, all politicans would be in jail!!!!

Something else a new SCOTUS should re-visit when they re-visit Citizens United.

I have come across many with tales of their military service. A very few were rightous. Most were phony. Anyone can learn to see the difference between the rightous and the liars. BTW, republicans leaders are liars. Obviously. And people that carry their water, are ignorant of facts and common sense. Hence our political dysfuction at a national level.

Since the information is lacking, I will have to assume that this guy didn't use his claim to help win a seat on the board, for if he did, that would surely be "fraud". Instead, since this has gone to the Supreme Court and is now national news, everyone in this country gets to know his name, location and what a lying scumbag he is. Given that technically he is within legal rights to claim that, I'm pretty good with the resulting outcome!

Lying is free speech. It is not illegal.

That being said, however, if you choose to lie, be prepared to accept the consequences.

That guy's going to be fired now, and will have a hard time getting another job because EVERYONE now knows he lied--he was on national news. background checks may not turn that up nut many employer are now looking at social media pages for the applicants they are trying to hire and as soon as they type this name this incident will turn up.

It's to bad that Mr. Alvarez wasn't taught morals, if he was taught morals, he would understand why this upsets a lot of people. If he has to lie in order to get this job, then the department had better think twice about hiring someone who would outright lie to them from the start.

1ZXX30860258616601.

journal,

"Read the article. No fraud was committed and no property was lost."

It's obvious that you just don't get it. You haven't the slightest clue of the meaning of an earned decoration. You don't know what is given to a person out of respect of an earned decoration.

To you it probably is just a little bit of colorful ribbon with a bauble attached to the end of the ribbon.

No money nor property was taken or gotton under false pretenses but every time a son of a b!tch falsely claims to have been decorated it cheapens the meaniing behind those awards. It insults all those that earned an award. However it takes one who has a bit of morals higher then those of an alley rat to understand what is truely lost due to actions such as this.

It goes beyond the right of free speech.

So illegals lying about being Americans must be protected too?

Yes, they are protected. Unless they use their claim to get something to which they are not otherwise entitled (driver's license, governmental benefits, etc....). The ruling explicitly pointed out that fraud is not protected.

Lying about receiving a Medal of Honor is dispicable. But, not everything of which we disapprove must be illegal. That seems to be a popular attitude these days, which I attribute to rising religous fervor (religion tends to be black and white, with no shades of grey).

Rockymtn,

As both a veteran of 33 years service and three conflicts (and I'd ask how YOU have served your nation) and a republican, ignorant comments that republicans leaders and those who support them is exceptionally vile and personally insulting. It is typical of liberals to result to insult. They will tell you that they have open minds until you have a different opinion and then they sling insults, curses, and slurs at you. The hypocrisy of the DNC openly oozes from it's fiber and its leaders unabashedly mistrepresent every truth, so it is a bit confounding to see remarks like that above. It you don't the intelect to have open diccourse - throw insults! It's the democratic way . . .

He pleaded guilty to violating the Stolen Valor Act, but claimed that his false statements were protected by the First Amendment right of free speech.

And now let me express my First Amendment right over this decision.

"Mr." Alvarez, You are a POS that has not once ounce of intestinal fortitude. You're lying a$$ should be forced to memorize [at least] 10 names from every Veteran cemetery (in the us and abroad). For it was these individuals that sacrifice for your right to lie.

Signed Great-Grand Daughter of WWI, Grand Daughter of WWII, Daughter of WWII, and Step-Daughter of Vietnam Veterans. Oh, and me, US Army SFC, MI, retired.

And SCOTUS, It's time that unhonorable "people" be appointed to the SCOTUS. It's time for the nation to vote your a$$es in and out. No more political appointments!

Enough now people wrote: "Alvarez, did anyone check his Immigration status? I think the name pretty well says it all."

Yeah, just like Marco Rubio, right?

Amanda, I agree. Lying about a military record can benefit a person temporary but it's very easy to expose the lie with a military background check.

I question the "free speech" part but regardless it was their defense and the SCOTUS bought it hook line and sinker so it's now history. Of course it they were to imprison anyone for lying the jails would be over crowded with politicians. Thus the reason for the SCOTUS decision.

One must remember that these Supreme Court Justices are American trained lawyers, just like Miami ambulance chasers. I don't see any difference.

It's not difficult to find documentation of falsified claims of being awarded a medal. Its the same as when some claims to have degree in Medicine, Law etc. He will just be called upon to provide documentation.

If he awarded for the medal is truely necessary then providing proof is not too much to ask.

There is no legal penalty for claiming a college, university degree. It fits the claiming a military rank, valor should fall under the same limitations and suffer the same penalties.

It goes without saying - that false claims for either will and should be contemptible.Any gains offered by making false claims should be dealt with by resending any benefit acquired under the false claim.

Thank you SCOTUS for undermining every service member who ever served this Country. And even the Congressional Medal of Honor...unbelievable!

I would have been disappointed if the court had found otherwise. I devoted a good portion of my life to defending our rights. Having said that, even basic trainees know how to deal with this offense, Blanket Party!

So according to the Supreme Court, lying is exercising my first Amendment rights? So then if I lie to cops or Judges, then they can't punish me for contempt, because I'm just exercising my rights, friggin moronic interpretation.

On a side note, now I am too be addressed as the First 6 Star General of the Armies!

Richard,

Just because someone claims something you have when they don't have it does not reduce in any way your real claim. Just like someone else getting married has no impact on my marriage. The only way this could cause you a problem is if you cause it yourself.

Congrats on your promotion General! Now try to gain something from it and you will be guilty of fraud. You can request that people refer to you by a certain title if you want, El Conquistidor, but it doesn't change who you actually are.

BTW, have fun lying in court. I'm sure that will work out fine for you.

Free speech sucks sometimes.

It lets the WBC protest funerals.

It lets morons lie about getting medals they didn't earn.

It lets people on here say some of the dumbest things I have ever read.

But, it needs to be like that. We can't pick and choose who can say what they want, or who we arrest for lying.

If someone is not financially profiting from the lie (fraud) or lying about someone else (slander) it is hard to see it being made to be illegal.

That being said, free speech also allows society to call these liars out and humiliate them for their lies-which is appropriate for anyone who lies about getting a medal of honor.

So then if I lie to cops or Judges, then they can't punish me for contempt, because I'm just exercising my rights, friggin moronic interpretation.

When speaking to cops or judges, you would be sworn to tell the truth in most circumstances. If you swear that you are telling the truth either in a court of law or by signing something, and lie, it is considered perjury.

This idiot never swore he was telling the truth "under penalty of perjury" so it is different.

GOOD!

The burden is on you and me to verify if someone is lying or misrepresenting their credentials. Don't be gullible.

People talk B.S. all the time and free speech protects their right to do so.

Should I conclude that if a soldier in Afghanistan goes out of his way to save his team during a heavy gun battle and is up for a Congressional Medal of Valor, he/she might as well not accept the medal because his/her veracity will be challenged about being awarded such a honor in the future?

I guess the criminal courts should now declare "null and void" perjury laws and anyone serving prison sentence for same should be immediately released.

I guess now I can tell everyone my neighbor is abberant degenerate - Oh wait he is, so to lie I will say he is a pillar of society - DAMN, this confusing!

So going by this ruling....today I will be a Police Officer, tomorrow I will decide what to claim. After all, I have the right to free speech.

What did you guys expect from a Supreme Court that apparently decided that corporations are people and hence have freedom of speech rights too?

Why should we waste a judges time with crap like this. This guy would not make a wart of a Marine's ass. Ihurra, shucks fogot im not a marine. Woopee! To much ncis.

I am also a veteran and agree with kevin and agree that this ruling was just. People lie everyday and that is not a crime. It is dishonorable, but not illegal. He did not receive cash or anything of value based on his claims, which would have made it fraud and illegal, hence a crime. He is a sorry pos, but he did nothing criminal.

I agree with the decision. Next time someone tells you they served or got an award, ask to see a certified copy their DD-214 before you will award social points. No proof, then sit down and stfu. Is simple as that.

spellcheck,

I would respectfully disagree with you. This individual portraid himself as a veteran to gain employment, therefore willfully misrepresenting himself. I would call that commiting fraud.

Likewise this court ruling legally protects lying. This ruling effectively make purgery protected by the 1st amendment.

I would respectfully disagree with you. This individual portraid himself as a veteran to gain employment, therefore willfully misrepresenting himself. I would call that commiting fraud.

We don't send people to prison for lying about college degrees or previous work responsibilities on their resumes. Why make this one exception? Since companies can, and do, fire people for lying on their applications and resumes, we already have a mechanism in place for dealing with people falsely claiming military award.

Maybe he has the MEXICAN MEDAL OF HONOR. They hand them out with every 6 pack of Corona Beer.

Mexican beer? Think I'm gonna puke......!

So going by this ruling....today I will be a Police Officer, tomorrow I will decide what to claim. After all, I have the right to free speech.

Sure, go right ahead. I've got no problem with you claiming to be a police officer. You can claim to be the Queen of England for all I care. Just don't try to ACT as a police officer. Then, you'll quite properly spend a number of years in jail.

If lying is a crime, then the majority of liberals and conservatives need to be locked up.

Nah, we already have too many laws and people in jail. Down with half the laws, let our people go!

What else would you expect from a court that does not know what an illegal alien is. They have no idea what is constitutional or not and they allow the slaughter of babies.

This country is going to the dogs. Thanks alot.

For the same reason I would oppose laws and find them unconstitutional that add extra punishment because of the nature of the crime (EG, you beat someone with a stick because you are angry = assault... You beat someone with a stick because they are (insert cause) and you are angry = assault AND a hate crime) I find this law unconstitutional and unnecessary.

We already have laws to deal with libel and slander. We have methods to deal with someone who misrepresents themselves. You can not add additional punishments for lying just because you want to pretend you are a patriot.

In fact, claiming patriotism is likely the WORST reason to sh*t on the constitution because your act proves your lack of patriotism.

It is _unfortunate— when people lie. It is not against the law nor should it be. If they lie and damages can be proven, then there are methods in which to deal with them _under the law— and the lie itself is still free speech (albeit ill considered).

This Supreme Court MUST be the biggest collection of IDIOTS ever to hold those positions!

If lying is "protected free speech" then ALL perjury laws in the nation have just been negated.

Fools!

Just another Mexican trying to steal another government benefit without fulfilling their duty.

sr71

Lying is protected by free speech? What a crock.

Totally agree with you but that is what you get in a liberal Democrat society. They are scum bags that don't amount to anything so they lie. Fine country we are!!!???

Alvarez, you are a disgusting piece of-@!$%#.

If lying is "protected free speech" then ALL perjury laws in the nation have just been negated.

1) In cases of perjury, the person has previously sworn to tell the truth. So, in essence, lying is breaking an agreement. If it changes the outcome of a court case or investigation, then lying could be considered a form of fraud.

2) Perjury interferes with the proper functioning of the justice system, just as fraud interferes with the economy and the rights of others.

The simplest reaction would have been to charge Alvarez with "Promulgating a fraud." Then, it would not have beena "free speech" issue.

He was trying to defraud the voters into electing him, based on immoral claims of heroic actions in the face of an active enemy attack. People can be jailed for attempting to advance their own lifestyles by defrauding others of informed decisions.

I can not figure out why everyone's getting so bent out of shape about this. Oh, that's right, people tend to have knee-jerk reactions and not really think about things. OK, let me hold your hand through some logic.

First, most MOH recipients are DEAD or in pretty bad shape. They don't hand them out with MRE's (at least not since the Civil War); You've got to EARN them with blood. If a guy's walking around with all his limbs claiming he won one, I'd check it out.

Second, it's pretty easy to find out who won one and who didn't. You can google it. The government takes pride in bestowing them. It takes AN ACT OF CONGRESS to win one. That kind of thing isn't kept secret. Again, if someone on a street corner claims he won one it's not hard to find out the truth.

Third, anyone who would claim they won one is obviously an idiot, a liar and a disrespectful jerk. BUT, do we really want to waste tax dollars arresting, housing, feeding and trying people just for running their mouths off? In that case, perhaps we might consider jailing all of Congress or anyone with a disagreeable political viewpoint. This is probably the most compelling reason to remove this law from the books.

As for the people who bought into his story, maybe they didn't buy it at all. Maybe they quickly realized he was a lying jerk and this just added a cherry on top of the prosecutorial fire. "Hey Fred, didn't Alvarez once say he was a Medal of Honor recipient? We can add that to the charges!"

Like I said, if you're walking around with all four limbs and twenty digits, you probably didn't win one and if you look up how people won one (call it "what they sacrificed", if you will) you probably wouldn't WANT to win one, no matter how honorable as it might be recognized as.

Me: ex-military BTW

So this is what our Unsupreme Court thinks of the Stolen Valor Act and our REAL veterans. Thank God that I can't be arrested for what I am thinking of our Unsupreme Court. Besides, that is free speech and it is allowed.

United States Senator Richard Blumenthal ( D-Connecticut ) must be breathing a sigh of relief today. Although I don't think he laid claim to earning any valued medals for heroism...during the recent campaign that put him into office, he was bagged for being a liar in his campaign speeches, where he spoke of fighting battles in Vietnam and of the struggles he faced upon his return from tha war.

Of course, Connecticut's ultra-liberal voters put this liar into the job anyway. He could have actuall fought with the Viet Cong against American soldiers and Connecticut's loony voters would have voted for him simply because of the (D) after his name.

That is the problem with lies in general, eventually the truth comes out. How can some people be so short sighted as to not realize the problems a lie can cause for so many other people and even entire organizations? Eventually liars get caught and punished anyway, so what is the point? I would have paid money to see the medal of shame on that mans face when he got caught.

@Barry-NJ Swearing to tell the truth would no longer be binding. because that could impinge upong my right to lie as governed by the first amendment. The SCOTUS has open a big hole here I don't think they considered all the angles they seem to focus on a particular minutiae and ignore the implications of their rulings and seem to have done so for about the last 20 years.

I honestly think that someone needs to post the exactly the first amendment is. Wait I forget people like this will still screw it up and get a pat on the back for it. Never mind.

Writing a dissent for himself, Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Samuel Alito said a long line of prior court decisions recognized “that the right to free speech does not protect false factual statements that inflict real harm and serve no legitimate interest.”

Alito said, “Legitimate award recipients and their families have expressed the harm they endure when an imposter takes credit for heroic actions that he never performed. One Medal of Honor recipient described the feeling as a ‘slap in the face of veterans who have paid the price and earned their medals.’”

It is amazing to see that at least 3 justices on the bench have such a warped interpretation of the Bill of Rights. This should be a MAJOR concern for all of us. How are we supposed to trust people to uphold the constitution if they don't understand it?

Second of all, I get that it's a crappy insult to real Vets when someone falsely claims to have served. But the harm in all of this is mostly to people's egos. The liars aren't getting any material benefits except for free stuff from individual companies who choose at their discretion to award military members. I've talked my way into getting plenty of free stuff in my life. Hell I should be able to walk into any establishment and say I successfully achieved Cold Fusion or finally discovered the God particle without fear of getting arrested. So why should saying I served in the military be any different?

What can combat the deceitfulness is a company policy that any favorable treatment to military members (like free services) should come with a waiver that they need to sign. The waiver can state that if it is found that their claim of military service turns out to be fault then that individual will be held liable for the cost and may be subjected to a lawsuit. The real vets should not have a problem with that. The fake ones will be to afraid to sign it and then, oh well, they don't get their free stuff!

BOTTOM LINE: Those of you that are trying to claim free speech shouldn't apply to lying are on crack! Speech is either free or it isn't. You can't have it both ways!!!

Freedom of speech carries with it certain responsibilities. There are some things that we, as a culture, hold very dear. The Medal of Honor is one of them and should be protected from false representation. It is like spitting on the Statue of Liberty. We award this medal to those who serve and protect our freedoms. The least we can do is hold it to be one of those things that one is not allowed to lie about without consequences. If there were more honor and heroes in this world, maybe there wouldn't be a child killed everyday by some gang bangers out for fun. We need these heroes...to diminish their sacrifice in anyway should be unlawful and forbidden. This isn't about free speech so much as it is about honor. Apparently, we no longer value honor, integrity, bravery, and fidelity. Our Congress has set that example--both sides of the isle--and the SCOTUS has upheld their twisted logic in the name of free speech. So, now, every politician can (continue to) lie to us and tell us about their great and untruthful acts without recourse. Some things are just wrong....This is one of them. It is depressing.

For Abyssoft. No, because when you agree to tell the truth under oath, you're entering a binding contract where various rules apply. These rules similarly apply when you enter into a binding contract in other areas. Lying when not entering into such contracts is what was affirmed as free speech. It was not affirmed that you may lie in any situation that you decide. It was affirmed that the government can't prosecute you for lying in the absence of such contracts for which fraud and perjury laws apply. People really need to learn the difference between a supreme court decision and what you think it might mean. You can't simply extrapolate such decisions to whatever suits your fancy... This is one of the reasons why justices will often add additional clarifications to their rulings to state "it does not mean such and such" or "This only applies to this particular form and is not to be interpreted as applying to this other law". It will help you to understand the logic behind various decisions far more effectively if you stop assuming that that everything under the sun that you define as applying actually applies to a supreme court decision...

Lying is protected by free speech? What a crock.

Ever listen to campaign ads --- lie after lie after lie -- and both sides are guilty.

Tale Radio -- lie after lie after lie.

Fox -- lie after lie after lie

So yes -- lying is protected speech.

Lying has always been protected free speech. I find it frightening and depressing that so many of you don't seem to understand that.

Even the most brutal, totalitarian dictator supports "free speech" as long as he likes what is being said. If you don't support people's right to say offensive things then you don't truly believe in the concept of freedom of speech.

This decision is WRONG! There are plenty of instances where lying is criminally punished: (1) lying under oath, (2) lying on taxes, (3) lying on an I-9 to gain employment, etc. Lying can be a crime. Therefore, this is a bad decision!

Mr. Alvarez......

Apparently you don't know what it is like to serve in the military. Therefore, I will now give you an opportunity to do so.

Pick a date, say within the next week, and I will obtain permission from the DOD to go back on active duty for one day to swear you into your choice of a branch of military service. HOWEVER, I reserve the right to select your first duty station after boot camp.

YOU ARE A FRAUD !!!

Looks like the SCOTUS is getting instructions from this Administration, pick and chose which Federal laws to uphold.

Nice how some of you are making an assumption that he's illegal because of his surname! And you wonder why the SC said the Arizona law must be implemented within very strict guidelines pr reasonable suspicion. You cannot assume a person's status based on superficial things as names, color, language, etc! I have an Irish surname. Are you going to ask me for my papers? Didn't think so!

This decision is WRONG! There are plenty of instances where lying is criminally punished: (1) lying under oath, (2) lying on taxes, (3) lying on an I-9 to gain employment, etc. Lying can be a crime. Therefore, this is a bad decision!

@Angelica ... the Supreme Court pointed out that not all lies are protected, and there are limits to speech when need to protect the rights of others. To take your examples, lying under oath could very well result in improperly sending someone to jail. Lying on taxes and lying on an I-9 are both fraudulent, which the SC specifically indicated was not protected.

Further proof of the lack of understanding of honor and duty on the part of the leftist libs on the Supreme Court..They should keep in mind that this may well come back to bite them in one way or another. Our veterans, past and present, deserve better than this!

Ed, silly republican, where exactly is free speech a political stand?
Its either absolute or not, and given their was no legal ramifications to his statement...just taking credit for something they could easily check out...well I would say stop believing everything everyone tells you and accept that part of a free nation is free speech.

Jan, first off I am not a Republican so you can forget that. I vote registered Independent or Libertarian depending on the issue. I am going to go on the assumption here that you have never served a day in uniform in the military or you would know better to make the statement you did. This is not a matter of a simple lie or freedom of speech. It is about a sense duty, honor, and conscience. Something Kagan, Sotomeyor, and their leftist lib ilk have no concepts of! If you support those individuals, then you obviously do not either.

I always find it amusing when talking to someone like Jan that if you do not like Obama or his minions, they automatically assume that you are a Republican and/or a right winger and label you as such. I gues it is part of the leftist liberal mindset that they have trouble accepting that there are increasingly large numbers of Democrats that don't care for him either anymore.

Yes because that WAS the first sentence.

Idiot.

Yay grammar police

The Supreme Court on Monday stroke down a federal law

It was either shoot it or "stroke it" down.

Don't you had to stroke it before you shoot it?

Outstanding!

I would have posted sooner, but I took a few minutes to consult "The Compact Edition of the Oxford Dictionary of the English Language" to verify that there were no exceptions to the rule, at least since "Beowulf" was written sometime circa the 8th century, really . . .

Really! :-o

Apparently, incompetent speech is also protection. Otherwise msnbc would have no reporters.

Or maybe..STRUCK DOWN? duh.

FRIST???? But Alvarez’s lawyers contended that the Frist Amendment freedom of speech protected “exaggerated anecdotes, barroom braggadocio, and cocktail party puffery.”

Dman, they must have read your comment ~ they corrected the spelling. :-)

Not only that; but he was protected by "Frist" Amendment Freedoms...

Yay grammar police

Joe-3144156 - I don't criticize folks on the vine who make typo's in comments. I've done it enough times myself. However, MSNBC is news organization that makes it business through journalism. These types of errors from a journalist are unacceptable. It's not like it's an isolated occurrence either. Finding an article written by a MSNBC staff writer without an error is the isolated incident. I would be embarrassed to have my name constantly associated with shoddy work.

I try not to get uptight about typos and grammatical errors. I tend not to care on comments sections, as some people don't type well, simply mis-type, or type as they speak. These people are also not trying to pass themselves off as professional journalists! I have to wonder, given that it's MS-NBC if they don't use Microsoft Word or some such as their document program - you know, the one that comes with a built in spell checker and grammer police? Even my 9 year old son knows how to do that!

I am a (honestly-spoken) Vietnam-era non-veteran, but now it can be (dishonestly) revealed that I won the nation's highest "civil" (?) award: the Medal of Honor while serving in the secret Seals unit that went totally under cover the duration of the war. It was tough fighting that war in the safety of the U.S.

The SCOTUS has become a laughing stock with its rulings as of late....

The things is his Alvarez's lawyers said he was being fraudulent, but he wasn't charged with fraud only "false speech" Wonderful when do the Fraud charges get filed?

So how would Clinton saying "I did not have sex with that women" refering to Monica Lewinsky, be considered in terms of this decision?

The problem with freedom is that it doesn't always protect the right actions, but a nation is either free or it's not. Someone who tells lies about someone else can be, and should be, liable for slander or libel, but someone who tells lies about themselves is really only commenting on their own lack of integrity.

These charlatans should certainly be "outed" for the liars, hypocrites and frauds they are, but...let's face it: if we put everyone who exaggerated their own status in jail, we would empty every branch of government from the city council up to the White House!

And BTW, Joe-3144156: don't even get me started on professional broadcasters who consistently mispronounce "Israel" and "nuclear," and persist in proagating phrasings like "him and I," "me and her," etc. etc. ad nauseum!

It's unfortunate - but looking at the big picture, it is the correct ruling. Yes, lying, so long as it's not in limited contexts like in court or to official investigators, is protected speech. Hiccup is you can't criminalize it without opening the door to criminalizing a ton of other speech that none but fascists would want to risk criminalizing.

Living free means putting up with despicable speech (NAMBLA?) every now and then - it's part of the price of freedom.

Ostracize wanna be Gi-Joes/ Audie Murpheys, ridicule them, even jump them in a dark alley if you can get away with it. But criminalize it? Naaaah.

Stroke down? The news came from TeleMundo and was then translated into English by one of their crack illegal news persons, then passed on to MSN.

Dan Rather made millions. Jose makes minimum wage.

Sorry, I still don't think this is about the occassional white lie. This is about honor and our national tributes....Maybe, if we had less tolerance for liars, we would have more honorable politicians? This isn't something you get to toss around at your next poker party. This is a token of a serious cultural value belonging to the brave who have served our country. Try walking into the Congress building and yelling "You're all a bunch of pigs." and see if anyone gets a bit upset. Free speech...technically a lie...but it should be just as free.

Once again, just because you get offended, doesn't mean it's not perfectly legal! Ever heard "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"? That's is a foundation of freedom of speech. We can't possibly practice it without offending someone's sensibilities at some point, so the definition has to be more open than more narrowed, or else it ceasts to exist. By the way, you can walk into Congress and yell that. It's not illegal. It doesn't mean there won't be repurcussions, though, like throwing you right back out the door!

The First Amendment trumps bravado - especially since most medals are just given away like candy. Jessica Lynch is an example; never fired a shot, was knocked unconscious, taking captive, but was award a medal for bravery - because she was pretty, female, and it looked good in the press.

Those pretending to have Congressional Medals of Honor - are the easiest to verify or deny through internet searches.

But still, as long as medals are given out as candy as in Lynch's case, and heros made out of friendly fire incidents by the Tilman case - there isn't a difference between a civilian giving himself a medal, and the military inventing a fictional story and pinning on a medal.

Napolean realized the importance of medals - give a man a medal, he'll step in front of more bullets. Same is true today. Give a man a bronze star; next he'll fight to win a Silver Star.

You are making it sound like a medal means nothing and that is incredibly insulting. Maybe some are given too easily or some haven't truely been earned but I have a father who risked his life and was shot numerous times. Every single medal he has was well earned but he most definitely did NOT do what he did for medals. Lying about a medal doesn't mean anything because most medals given aren't earned is what you conveyed above and that's disgusting.

Heeeez seestir eeeezz Sodamayer. A wise latina!

appeasersfate,

"What Latino doesn't have to lie to get a job in the US?" Try LEGAL latinos.

Legal, where are those three legals hiding out?. This country is full of illegals and illegal appeasers pandering for their votes. If we actually enforced Immigration decades ago we wouldn't have to worry about them all taking over our cities and our politics. Now we are stuck with a burgeoning polulation of "quasi-legal" latinos fighting for more rights for illegal latinos.

ok if you have the Medal what number is it so we can look you up to make sure you are on the level.

"From the Halls of Montezuema"........................shouldn't we be bombing Mexico?

Show us your DD 214!

Both Dems and Reps voted for this law. It was bipartisan when it was enacted.

Bush is and always will be the crap that @!$%# up the country for 8 long years.

Palin saved us in Alaska from a Russian Invasion as Commander in Chief of the Alaska National Guard.

While Clinton was expressing his revulsion with his nations military and hiding overseas, Gore was getting bailed out of Nam by his Daddy, and Obama was a good little muslim boy in Indonesia. Give it a break if you can't say something other than stupid crap.

Rick, shut up, you don't know the story - only what you have read in and heard from a very liberal news.

Remember Dan Rather's failed attempt to discredit.

In a few years - Republicans will be taking credit for this too. There are already a few that are starting to remind people that GW (Bush) and Romney were for Obama-care. All obama did was pick the "play book" and follow the script.

Success has many Fathers ... while failure, is an Orphan.

Give it a few years - by then, every thing Obama has done ... He was only following in the footsteps that Repblican laid down first....

Already, getting us out of Iraq, cleaning up Git Mo, getting Ben Laden... the Republicans are claiming credit....

Those vets serve to protect the freedoms of every American, most especially one's right to free speech. To say the prestige of a medal is more important than the defense of freedom is ludicrous. Our soldiers defend every citizen, not just the ones who use their rights the way they prefer.

How many wars have YOU served in and how many men have YOU seen die saving their friends in combat??? I didn't fight in 3 wars, get shot up, and EARN medals of valor for people like YOU that just don't get there is something higher than individual rights - it's called honor.

Too bad you combat vets forgot to protect the US-Mexico border.

JP - your words and your alleged deeds are noble, but just like any other poster or speaker, unless they're independently verifiable, they always need to be taken with a grain of salt. Otherwise, how do any of us reading your comment really know you're not another Xavier Alvarez?

I don't mean to insult or offend, I only mean to shed light on a disturbing trend - don't people check this kind of s&!t out right away? If everyone could take everyone at their word, there should have been no reason for this law, or this lawsuit. If common sense ruled, this particular matter would never have gotten as far as it did.

Lying for the sake of lying is NOT against the law. Lying in order to obtain something is fraud, and IS against the law. There's a difference. What Alvarez did was reprehensible, but NOT against the law.

Without mentioning anyone specifically, I appreciate those who have defended our liberties. However, that doesn't really give you the right to tell people what those liberties are. Free speech is free speech as long as you're not defrauding someone - even if it's offensive to those who truly sacrificed to provide you that forum.

JP-345944: I didn't serve in any wars, or in the military at all; I thank you for your service; honor is inestimable in value, but speaking as a civilian citizen who relies on the protections of the Constitution (which as a practical matter is upheld not only by judges but brave people like you) I will say honor does not trump individual rights, and in fact there is no reason to put these two values into artificial conflict.

there is something higher than individual rights - it's called honor.

Sorry, but that is not true. In this country, individual rights should trump most anything, although they often don't.

This decision was correct.

hambone,

What the hell?!!! "individual rights should trump most anything?!! You really need to look up the definition of the word "society", then look up the word "stupid".

Richard,

Our Bill of Rights is all about the right of the individual. As long as my rights don't infringe on someone else's rights, everything is a-o.k. Even in a "society".

Have you read the First Amendment?

Speech doesn't have to be pretty. Speech doesn't have to be truthful. It is only illegal if it infringes on the rights of others or causes harm. And hurt feelings are not considered harm.

You even have the right to call me stupid. Congratulations.

The decision was correct.

Let's face it.

OBAMA lies, lies, lies to the American people about everything.

He should be the first one to get sued.

Fate...You are one ridicuous piece of work....The combat vets didn't protect the American border because they haven't been ordered to do so. If and when they are, they will do their best. The vets don't get to decided where and when to go. You are ignorant and your lack of honor and integrity is showing....but you do have the right to be stupid and express your stupidity in these posts...after all, it's all about freedom of speech, right?

It figures that it is a Hispanic named "Alverez" that lied about his true identity

***************

He learned it from all the illegals.

Freedom of Speech.....but only for English speakers!

So our country would be better if we enforced more limitations to speech (that doesn't cause harm to anyone, (except their sensibilities)? Seriously?

Excellent point. I hope that someone tries it!

Observer2000,

They probably would judge him incompetent.

Observer, that's his right as long as he doesn't use that claim to obtain something fraudulently or tries to act as a judge. At one time, we had dozens of people running around claiming to be the descendants of the last Czar. All phony, but we didn't lock them up. Instead, they got invited to parties.

Our freedom of speech allows us to express our opinions without censure and to say what we believe to be true. It doesn't gives us the right to write blank checks on our past that are lies. We do not have the right to lie. We have the right to speak and those that are awarded the Medal of Honor fight for that right. Lying has become the norm rather than the exception and the SCOTUS just justified it. I have never served. I was a nurse for 39 years. Honor still means something to me and it is high time that we gave a nod toward integrity and bravery...rather than justifying lying as a "freedom." All you vets that have posted here...Thank you. I admire your patience and your service to our country. Your sacrifices should not be walked on by scum like this, then rationalized by our highest court in the land. You deserve the honors you receive and do not deserve to have them diminished in any way.

Lying is protected speech, fraud is not. There is a difference.

Except when it's Clinton and he's sitting in the WhiteHouse. But yeah, all the OTHER times, right?

This isn't about your stupid views on conservatives or party-line crapola. It's about lost valor and a nation that gives lip service when only 1% of its people every put the uniform on. What the hell makes YOU and expert on truth. From your steady stream of BS it appears you would'nt know the truth if it hit you between the eyes. Pathetic!

JP- no soldier, marine, sailor, or airman, who has rightly and justly been awarded a medal for valor can have that valor stolen. Liars are liars. When they lie they will be found out and they will personally suffer the consequences of their lies. You cannot legislate morality. The politician lied. Who's surprised? He was smart enough not to commit fraud based in his lies. It's the uniformed valorous liers who puff up their awards fraudulantly while on active duty in order to receive a greater retirement check that deminish the valor of all of our military.

And JP, you are the all knowing and all seeing "Wizard of OZ" right?

And how is this about "lost valor?" If you have earned a medal by serving this country, you did not "lose" valor. It's about lying to "gain" valor that you do not deserve.

With our freedoms also come the freedoms of others to say things that you don't like. I don't like it when people lie about serving in the military nor do I like watching "News" programs that lie to its viewers, but that is what is so great and not so great about the first amendment. It gives us the "RIGHT" to say what we want, factual or not. This is just like burning the American flag. I don't like it, you don't like it, but it is a form of Speech! I would rather deal with people who do things and say things I don't like (Faux Propaganda Viewers for one) than curtail their right to say and do those things. How do I know that the next time I say something that you don't like you will buy your congressman to make a law against what I said? I don't want to live or have my children live in a country like that.

Well,Sarge, they are doing a pretty good job lately of legistating immorality...and the rich get richer and the poor still bleed. Maybe, it is time to legislate some honor and integrity....Just sayin.....

Don't you people see, it's when something offends us the most that our adherence to freedom is the most tested. If we cannot see past our personal distaste and understand the bigger picture of how narrowing the definition of free speech will eventually make it non-existant, then you have to question how much we value it at all.

Remember swiftboat Johnny Kerry? All that is required is that good men speak out. The liars, posers and clowns will be swept aside when they do.

I suggest that perhaps a few of our Marines take this guy out back and make sure he earns those claimed medals for the all the "wounds" he sustained. Help him not to be a liar........

Pocket, instead of a medal that can be removed, a tattoo.....that'll last forever.

And I'm thinking that tattoo should be right across the forehead...

Kind of like cutting a swastika on his forehead, like in Inglorius Bastards, Right?

It only embarrasses and angers those who really did serve if the community voting the fake into office never checks to make sure the person is telling the truth. It really isn't that hard to check and see if someone served or not, and what medals were awarded, if any. The real problem is that the community Mr. Alvarez was lying to was too stupid to do any fact checking for themselves BEFORE they elected him. I guess people always assume that it's up to somebody else to do that. But to say that just telling a lie to make yourself seem important is illegal, well, there are plenty of people all over the country who make a living at doing that.... most of them elected. Mr. Alvarez and his falsehoods didn't cost anyone their lives, jobs, property, or safety.

And if some fake in a small town meeting lying about his accomplishments truly DEVALUES the risks taken by soldiers and the meaning of the medals they earn, then they really aren't worth the paper the order was printed on or the metal and ribbon it took to make them. Some fake somewhere can't take away the VALUE of what you have done. Only you can DEVALUE your own life and your accomplishments. If you believe otherwise, then you aren't worth the skin and bone it took to make you.

There was a guy here who claimed that he was a decorated veteran. Seems no one checked on his story EXCEPT the American ExPrisoners of War. Yes, he even claimed he had been a prisoner of war. He applied for membership in the organization-- there was NO PROOF so his application was denied.

He went so far as to get all sorts of benefits for his service. He should be shot at sunrise.

I knew a guy years ago that claimed he had been awarded the Medal of Honor. Friends of his who had known him longer believed his story. He even had bought one and had his picture taken wearing it. Mind you, that was back when it could be bought-- and someone altered it so it had his name on it. I found out and told his friends. Upon his death an article about his lying was published in the newspaper-- the info came from an inspector.

This guy claimed he had been a Marine. The father of the inspector was a retired Marine and he really got hot under the collar. Once a Marine always a Marine.

Regardless of if it was legal or illegal to tell lies, they are politicians and they are going to lie anyway. I think it is a right of passage.

True, but, now they have a legal precedent to fall back on. We will never know who to believe again because lying has just become the norm and rationalized as freedom of speech....Libel and slander have gone by the way and honor has no meaning.

So, they will be found out and not get the result they were going for. That is the punishment. You seriously want to make it a crime?

Several years later, Alvarez became known as "The Punching Bag of Pomona."

Several years later, Alvarez became known as "The Punching Bag of Pomona."

At the very least, Alvarez should be fired as a matter of fact for Lying. His lies may be protected under free speech but as an employer, i have fired many a folk for lying. This calls his character into question and i believe it gives just cause to the council to remove him from the board. Then maybe he can go back to his roots and pick up a case of oranges. There will always be a street waiting for him to sell his wares.

That is exactly where the punishment should be meted out. If you verify claims before you accept them, you will not be duped.

So is it okay if I take your credit card numbers and insert them into the proper spaces to pay my bills and then just say I was inflating and deflating the values of the numbers on my card in a specific order and now you have to pay because I have freedom of speech? That is not the same as yelling fire in a crowd either.

I agree completely. It's a shame that someone would lie about something like this, but lets not sh%^ all over the first amendment because people feel a certain way about something. Also let me be clear, I am thankful for the men and women that serve our country and put their life in danger every day. That being said I think they would agree that you can't pick and choose what type of speech you want to limit... What would be next, people go to jail for lying about having college degrees. Doesn't sound like any good fact checking was done on this political candidate ahead of time.

Serve in the Army, go to war, get shot at, see your friends die, and then run your stupid ass remarks of adulation about yet another immoral decision that people like you seem to think is ok. You are typical of people that always place the individual and me me above such things as character, honor, and selfless service. You're right - it's not the same as yelling fire in a theater - IT'S WORSE. Take a trip to Arlinton National Cemetary if you don't get it.

dmiller,

What non-sensical response. First of all you've committed theft, I don't have to go any further.

JP.

Sorry if you don't like free speech and I have the deepest respect for the military but you are protecting our free speech by serving don't diminsh what you protect.

So saying that you have done something that others have done but you have not is not considered theft? Taking someones accomplishments and claiming them as your own is indeed theft, much like taking someones credit card number that does not belong to them. They are stealing the accomplishment, medals, valor, etc., that does not belong to them.

dmiller,

I could run around telling ladies I'm a doctor to get laid. Is that illegal? Is that stealing from the accomplishments of doctors?

If I lie to my boss about why I was late this morning, is that illegal? It's not even illegal to "embellish" your CV.

The guy told a lie. It was a dishonorable and pathetic, but it was just a lie. He didn't steal a medal. He just lied.

This was a good ruling.

And this is coming from a former Rear Admiral in the Air Force.

Then tell me hambone, what do we allow those who sacrifice so much to keep as their own? This S.C. should be sent for a couple of tours then be brought home and sat next to some lying dirtbag who never got off his damn bar stool the whole freakin war tell about how he saved EVERYONE and how bad it was over THERE. I bet NONE of the S.C. brainfart, "I'm gonna do what Uncle Sambamma wants me to do instead of what's right" pinko traitor scumbags have served a day anywhere but Harvard and Yale. They chose against democracy twice today. At least this will put the final nail in Obamma's presidential coffin. (not a threat, only talking about no second term there SecServ boys). Just wish there was someone worth their weight in doggie doo that would be replacing him.

Hambone, either that was a confused statement: "former Rear Admiral in the Air Force" or else you are using your 1st Amendment right to free speech?

@jack: Bingo! It's the latter. Did I offend someone?

@paldude: Who is Uncle Sambamma? And I agree that it was a dishonorable, pathetic lie. But it was just a lie. Hurt feelings do not make it illegal.

It's not "just a lie" Hambone. In the long run of serving the citizens of our nation, the only lasting payoff for those that sacrifice, is the honor and public respect (along with their the pride for their bravery) that they get from those of us that understand what it took for them to do what they did. It's no different to me than stealing a paycheck that was not earned. (worse actually). Very much like taking credit for a job someone else did. These are NOT just lies. I do understand you though Hambone and am not offended by you're thoughts at all. I just feel that the vets deserve better. They put it all on the line for us and the take 'em for granted politicians that sent them there. A lot of people don't see the big picture in this. Those that take credit for service not rendered are disrespecting and stealing from everyone. Even themselves.

I totally agree with you that those who have served deserve better. Even I'm offended by his words. But that doesn't change the fact that he was just misusing words.

We cannot allow this to become emotional. It is constitutional. It is his right. Just as it is my right to claim to be a retired Rear Admiral for the USAF (which I totally was and even earned the purple star!)

Taking someones accomplishments and claiming them as your own is indeed theft, much like taking someones credit card number that does not belong to them.

He didn't take "someones accomplishments" as his own. He claimed something that didn't happen. If it was theft, who incurred the loss?

Only a tough call for people that have never served in combat; which is about 90% of the population of military age adults.

Usually the ones claiming heroic B.S. on their resume's are outed by someone looking into their records. It happens over and over, anyone thinking that these wrong doers will profit from their lies are wrong. In the end the liars will be humiliated. The stolen valor act was always another one of the republican smoke screen false patriotism BS issue. You want to do something for the vets? Get the economy out of the ditch and streamline them back into our society, rather than voting for some Darell Issa BS contempt charges agaisnt the AG.

It's sad that people lie about valor, but I agree with your summary, EarlyOut. That doesn't mean that once they are found out that we can't excoriate and even publicly humiliate them as appropriate to their misdeed. There's just no reason for the government to become involved unless it entailed an actual crime.

--mark d., CMSgt, USAF (Retired)

Mark - I agree with your post. We can police our own and don't need a law to do it. You don't have to talk to someone very long to know if they're sincere and real or not. Thank You for your Service.

Mike R. - Senior Chief Radioman USN (Retired)

www.riflewarrior.com/vietnam.html

You reminded me of what a big part of what this may be about Earlyout. They want to protect their ability to say anything about an opponent candidate regardless of truth without any legal repercussions. The politicians really are the crust. Very flaky indeed.

You are wrong there JP. Not a tough call at all for about at least 98%. (guesstimate) I only served on a sub and never saw combat., but I feel not only the obligation, but also the need to show those who have been in the battle ground the highest appreciation that I'm capable of showing. And all my friends who never server at all probably feel stronger about this than I. Especially when our troops have been SO taken for granted by BOTH political parties. Thank you all again. I can never say it enough.

Mark and veteran, I see your point but the law doesn't have to chuck these nitwhits in a cell. It can meet the crime such as public service in a veterans home with a sign around their neck saying what they were doing along with public notice in the local paper. etc. A law for the people is what I wanted to see instead of one that is politically self serving to some politician or large company.

I too am a veteran, as was my father, a WWII navy veteran with a Purple Heart. Making fraudulent assertions that you were awarded a military medal, or honor, has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Simply put, it demonstrates a supreme lack of integrity and an inherent disrespect for those veterans who were rightfully awarded those honors and is nothing less than theft of honor by deception. Dad neither wore nor displayed his Purple Heart, despite have been a longstanding member of the American Legion, and having marched in many a parade with his Legion post. It was only a cause for discussion in the later years of his life, and mostly with the grandchildren. It was something we had to drag out of him. I know many veterans who act similarly. Therefore, anyone bragging about his military honors would raise a red flag to me. You may be able to steal an award, but you can never steal the integrity of someone who truly earned the award.

Navygirl1968

Very well stated position, God bless you and your dad.

Navygirl - To those who have fought for it, Freedom has a savor the protected will never know. My Dad was a Submariner during WW-II he died in 1999. I don't know if your Dad is still alive, but either way I salute him for helping to save the world and I salute you for continuing the tradition. Peace. Mike

What about when they put it to paper....use it on a job application or to gain office?

Companies are free to fire employees who lie on applications or resumes.