|
False claims to valor are not victimless crimes
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals got it wrong on the Stolen Valor Act.The 2005 law was a response to the seemingly countless people who fraudulently represent themselves as decorated combat veterans. A 2008 Chicago Tribune investigation found, for example, that tombstones, obituaries and even the online edition of Who's Who were rife with unsubstantiated claims of combat honors. Often the bogus heroes never served in the military at all. In a case now before the 10th Court of Appeals, a Colorado man passed himself off as a Marine Corps captain who'd won a Purple Heart and suffered post-traumatic stress from a roadside bomb during one of his three tours in Iraq. Oh yes, he'd also gone to the U.S. Naval Academy. When someone took a closer look, he turned out to have no military record at all, just a criminal one. Under the Stolen Valor Act, such an imposter can face fines and up to a year in prison. We're uncomfortable with prison sentences in cases like his. But the Ninth Circuit was wrong recently when -- in a similar case -- it held that the law violated the First Amendment. The First Amendment guarantees free speech, but it doesn't guarantee legal immunity for all forms of expression. It doesn't protect fraud, obscenity, incitement to violence and defamation, for example. Limited classes of expression can be outlawed if there is a legitimate and compelling purpose for doing so. The issue of stolen valor has a parallel in laws against impersonating a police officer. That's a crime even when the impersonator is only out to impress people. False claims to military honors are not mere white lies; they hurt people. Honest political candidates can be defeated by opponents who run on false war records. Job candidates can be edged out by rivals who falsely present themselves as combat heroes. Taxpayers get fleeced when fictional decorations are used to bolster claims for veterans' benefits. The greatest injury is done to bona fide heroes. Imposters undermine the integrity of medals of valor, cheapening decorations awarded exclusively for acts of utmost bravery. America has a compelling interest in preserving the reputation of these honors and their recipients. In voting to strike down the law, one Ninth Circuit judge cited America's historic wariness of letting the government "police the line between truth and falsity."
In the case of medals of valor, such as the Medal of Honor, the Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross, the Air Force Cross and the Silver Star, there's no room for government discretion: It's an objective matter of record whether a given person has or hasn't earned one. This line is so bright that officials would have a hard time monkeying with it. Rather than prison time, we would prefer that the law provide civil sanctions, perhaps including the exposure of imposters in an online hall of shame. For people who steal the honor of heroes to impress others, public humiliation would be condign punishment. Posted by: 746 2011-04-03 |
|
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=319627 |