WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court agreed yesterday to decide whether Congress can make it a crime to lie about earning military medals.
The court said it will rule on the constitutionality of a law that makes it a federal crime for people to claim falsely, either in writing or aloud, that they have been awarded the Medal of Honor, a Silver Star, Purple Heart, or any other military medal.
The Stolen Valor Act, which passed Congress in 2006, apparently has been used only a few dozen times, but the underlying issue of false claims of military heroism has struck a chord in an era in which American soldiers are fighting two wars.
At the same time, the justices have issued a series of rulings in recent terms in favor of free expression, striking down California’s violent video restrictions and a federal law involving cruelty to animals. It also upheld the right of protesters to picket military funerals with provocative, even offensive, messages.
The federal Appeals Court in California struck down the military medals law on free speech grounds, and appeals courts in Colorado, Georgia, and Missouri are considering similar cases.
The Obama administration argues that the law “serves a crucial purpose in safeguarding the military honors system.’’ The administration also says the law is reasonable because it only applies to instances in which the speaker intends to portray himself as a medal recipient.
The case concerns the government’s prosecution of Xavier Alvarez of Pomona, Calif. A member of the local water district board, Alvarez 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. In fact, he had never served in the military.
He was indicted and pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would challenge the law’s constitutionality in his appeal.
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 San Francisco-based Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals voted, 2 to 1, to strike down the law.
The majority said there is no evidence that lies such as the one told by Alvarez harm anybody and no compelling reason to make a crime out of them.