Reposted from Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. ONA, along with a number of media organizations, joined the amicus brief that Justice Roberts cited “for its examples of how public exposure can mitigate a lie and discredit its source, particularly in cases where false claims were made of military heroism.”
Press Release | June 28, 2012
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press lauded the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling today striking down the Stolen Valor Act as unconstitutional. Ruling in U.S. v. Alvarez, the Court found that the Act – which makes it a criminal offense to lie about military honors – violates the First Amendment.
“Once again, the Supreme Court has recognized that the marketplace of ideas is the appropriate place to regulate obnoxious and offense speech,” said Reporters Committee Executive Director Lucy A. Dalglish. “While Mr. Alvarez clearly is a habitual liar, we’re pleased the Court resisted the temptation to uphold a content-based restriction on a new category of speech.
“Upholding this law would have opened the door to efforts by lawmakers to develop a list of subjects for which false speech would be punishable,” Dalglish said. “Those lists probably would have been put forward by special interests who believe false speech about them was more offensive than false speech about others. There are ample vehicles to punish those whose false speech actually damages others, including claims for libel, perjury and fraud.”
Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion for the court cited the Reporters Committee’s friend-of-the-court brief for its examples of how public exposure can mitigate a lie and discredit its source, particularly in cases where false claims were made of military heroism.
The Reporters Committee was joined by 23 news organizations in its friend-of-the-court brief, which is available online. The brief was written by Robert Corn-Revere of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.