Camper
Not a Member
This being an issue that's near and dare to me, I think this is yet another example of how the Retardplicans and Dumbocrats continue to aid and abet this cess pit of a court system.
Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional | Emily Babay | Crime & Punishment | Washington Examiner
Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional
By: Emily Babay | Examiner Staff Writer | Follow her: @emilybabay | 09/05/11 8:05 PM
.A judge has dismissed a case against a former Silver Spring man accused of lying about his military honors, ruling that the law he was charged with violating is unconstitutional.
In throwing out the case against Aaron Lawless, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas DiGirolamo is the fourth federal judge to weigh in on the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act -- a debate making its way to the Supreme Court.
A criminal complaint says Lawless falsely told the gun manufacturer Glock that he had suffered combat injuries in Iraq while serving in the Marine Corps and Army, earning a Silver Star, four Purple Hearts and two Bronze Stars. Glock then named him its hero of the year, awarding him a trip to a Las Vegas gun show and engraved pistols.
The act, which became law in 2006, makes it illegal for someone to falsely claim to hold military honors or decorations.
Lawless' attorneys sought to have his case dismissed, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment.
DiGirolamo agreed, writing in his opinion that the act is a too-broad regulation of speech.
"In its present form, the Act punishes all false statements about the receipt of military honors, including the malicious, the reckless, the mistaken and the innocent," he wrote. The opinion later notes that prosecutors don't need "to prove that the false statement was knowingly made by the speaker, that the statement was made with the intent to deceive anyone, or that the statement actually caused harm to the reputation of military honors."
Federal courts have split on the law's constitutionality.
A judge in Virginia upheld the law; a Colorado judge struck it down. The California-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found the law unconstitutional last year, and the government asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case last month.
A bill is pending in the House of Representatives that would narrow the law and make it a crime to lie about military awards for financial gain.
Prosecutors in Lawless' case intend to appeal the ruling, according to a court filing. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maryland declined to comment further. In court papers, prosecutors argued that the speech the act bans isn't protected by the First Amendment.
Court documents say Lawless made the false claims to Glock when he was working part-time at Atlantic Guns in Silver Spring while receiving treatment at Walter Reed Medical Center.
[email protected]
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional | Emily Babay | Crime & Punishment | Washington Examiner
Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional | Emily Babay | Crime & Punishment | Washington Examiner
Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional
By: Emily Babay | Examiner Staff Writer | Follow her: @emilybabay | 09/05/11 8:05 PM
.A judge has dismissed a case against a former Silver Spring man accused of lying about his military honors, ruling that the law he was charged with violating is unconstitutional.
In throwing out the case against Aaron Lawless, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas DiGirolamo is the fourth federal judge to weigh in on the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act -- a debate making its way to the Supreme Court.
A criminal complaint says Lawless falsely told the gun manufacturer Glock that he had suffered combat injuries in Iraq while serving in the Marine Corps and Army, earning a Silver Star, four Purple Hearts and two Bronze Stars. Glock then named him its hero of the year, awarding him a trip to a Las Vegas gun show and engraved pistols.
The act, which became law in 2006, makes it illegal for someone to falsely claim to hold military honors or decorations.
Lawless' attorneys sought to have his case dismissed, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment.
DiGirolamo agreed, writing in his opinion that the act is a too-broad regulation of speech.
"In its present form, the Act punishes all false statements about the receipt of military honors, including the malicious, the reckless, the mistaken and the innocent," he wrote. The opinion later notes that prosecutors don't need "to prove that the false statement was knowingly made by the speaker, that the statement was made with the intent to deceive anyone, or that the statement actually caused harm to the reputation of military honors."
Federal courts have split on the law's constitutionality.
A judge in Virginia upheld the law; a Colorado judge struck it down. The California-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found the law unconstitutional last year, and the government asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case last month.
A bill is pending in the House of Representatives that would narrow the law and make it a crime to lie about military awards for financial gain.
Prosecutors in Lawless' case intend to appeal the ruling, according to a court filing. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office for Maryland declined to comment further. In court papers, prosecutors argued that the speech the act bans isn't protected by the First Amendment.
Court documents say Lawless made the false claims to Glock when he was working part-time at Atlantic Guns in Silver Spring while receiving treatment at Walter Reed Medical Center.
[email protected]
Read more at the Washington Examiner: Md. judge rules Stolen Valor Act unconstitutional | Emily Babay | Crime & Punishment | Washington Examiner
