Legal Meets Practical: Accessible Solutions

Jail Time for Liars: Stolen Valor Act Passes Congress

Just in time for Memorial Day, the Stolen Valor Act was passed by Congress on May 23 to criminalize the act of lying about having earned certain military honors. It now awaits President Obama’s signature.

Not every combat award is covered, but the ones most worn by wannabe heroes will be protected once the bill becomes law. Protected are the Medal of Honor, service crosses, Silver Star, Purple Heart, and combat badges such as the Combat Infantryman’s Badge, Combat Action Badge, Combat Medical Badge, Combat Action Ribbon and Combat Action Medal. The maximum punishment under the bill will be a $100,000 fine and up to one year in jail for each offense.

This comes after the United States Supreme Court struck down a 2005 version of the Stolen Valor Act, in Alvarez v. U.S (2012). There, a man was convicted under the Stolen Valor Act for claiming he had received the Medal of Honor. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the Stolen Valor Act was an unconstitutional abridgment of free speech. In penning the majority opinion, Justice Kennedy expressed his concern that upholding the law would permit the government to “start a list of subjects about which false statements are punishable.”

The new Stolen Valor Act was written to be less sweeping than its predecessor, mitigating constitutional challenge by targeting fraudulent representation of military service for profit. The more narrowly-focused bill states, “whoever, with intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit, fraudulently holds oneself out to be a recipient of a decoration or medal shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” The bill covers issues ranging from lying to receive veteran or health care benefits to obtaining a government contract or getting a job reserved for a veteran. One of its co-sponsors, Nevada Congressman Joe Heck, issued a press release explaining how the new bill addressed the Supreme Court’s issues with freedom of speech. That press release can be issued here.

When I learned about the Stolen Valor Act, I was an instant supporter. As veteran small business owners know, both the Small Business Administration and the Center for Veterans Enterprise have encountered issues with individuals lying about veteran status in order to obtain federal government contracts. I hoped that the publicity surrounding the Stolen Valor Act, and its penalties, would deter individuals from misrepresenting veteran status. There’s nothing like the possibility of a jail sentence to inspire honesty.

Unfortunately, upon reading the actual bill, I realized its language criminalizes lying about medals and honors only, not veteran status in and of itself. This means that individuals who misrepresent veteran status to obtain federal government contracts are not covered by the Stolen Valor Act. I would like to know more about what the legislative history of the Stolen Valor Act says on this topic, because it was likely addressed. As the nature of the Stolen Valor Act addresses military decorations, perhaps this was beyond the scope of the bill. At any rate, the Stolen Valor Act should be celebrated for protecting the honor and integrity attached to military accolades.

For further reading, access the Stolen Valor Act here. Also, if you found this article informative, sign up for my weekly blog on my homepage. Remember to click the link sent to your email to activate your subscription!

 

 

5 Responses to “Jail Time for Liars: Stolen Valor Act Passes Congress”

  1. Just yesterday, I deactivated my spam filter (which blocked essentially all comments) in favor of one that will hopefully be less wide-sweeping. I look forward to comments on these important topics!

  2. I am glad that they are making the public aware of the seriousness of this issue, but I am sort of torn because I wouldn’t want anything that infringes on free speech! Wouldn’t lying about your veteran status or military awards already be covered under anti-fraud laws?

    • Hi Erin,

      Thanks for commenting!

      The free speech concern was the reason the Supreme Court struck down the original act. It was the slippery slope argument – how do you draw the line between lies that are criminal in nature and those which constitute free speech? If it’s illegal to say you received the Bronze Star, what other lies would be illegal?

      I do think this new law is much more narrowly defined to where it removes the free speech issue. It doesn’t encompass statements made for the sake of bragging or just to say it – it requires the intent to receive a tangible benefit. So the guy bragging to his buddies at the Fourth of July BBQ about a medal he didn’t receive isn’t covered, but the guy doing the same at a job interview (in hopes it lands him the job) is.

      And yes, federal anti-fraud laws that cover this as well. Depending on the facts, a few different laws might apply. Not that the penalties aren’t serious, but I feel like a main purpose of the Stolen Valor Act is to shame (especially given its name).

      Sarah

      • Would a man lying to his girlfriend about his awards, in the hopes of a tangible physical reward, then be covered by this law as well?

  3. Here is a link about an officer being arrested and charged with falsifying his military record; the Stolen Valor Act wasn’t needed to do it either!

    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/06/13/ex-cop-arrested-for-lying-about-purple-heart.html?ESRC=army.nl

Mission Statement

My mission is to provide accessible, high-quality legal services to small business owners and to veterans. I will strive to clearly communicate, understand objectives, and formulate and execute effective legal solutions.

Disclaimer

No Attorney-Client Relationship

This website is maintained exclusively for informational purposes. It is not intended to provide legal or other professional advice and does not necessarily represent the opinions of the lawyer or her clients. Viewing this site, using information from it, or communicating with Sarah Schauerte through this site by email does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Non-Reliance

Online readers should not act nor decline to act, based on content from this site, without first consulting an attorney or other appropriate professional. Because the law changes frequently, this website's content may not indicate the current state of the law. Nothing on this site is meant to predict or guarantee future results. I am not liable for the use or interpretation of information contained on this website, and expressly disclaim all liability for any actions you take or fail to take, based on this website's content.

Links

I do not necessarily endorse and am not responsible for content accessed through this website's links to other Internet resources. Correctness and adequacy of information on those sites is not guaranteed, and unless otherwise stated, I am not associated with such linked sites.

Contacting Me

You may email me through the email address provided by this site, but information you send through email or this website is not secure and may not be confidential. Communications will not be treated as privileged unless I already represent you. Do not send confidential information until you have established a formal attorney-client relationship with me. Even if I represent you, please understand that email security is still uncertain and that you accept all risks of such uncertainty and potential lack of confidentiality when you send us unencrypted, sensitive, or confidential email. Email from me never constitutes an electronic signature, unless it expressly says so.