The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Fields claimed that the right to lie about this award is protected by the First Amendment, his right to free speech. Fields also claimed that he did not harm another person through his claim. The fact that he went out and bought a Purple Heart and pinned it to his jacket and started lying about it, which didn't hurt anyone else. Fields did not receive anything valuable because of the claim. He wasn't trying to wear this in order to incite or elicit money or monetary donations from anyone else. As a Supreme Court Justice, I believe that the lie was made intentionally, so it should not be protected, under the idea of perjury. Lies about the award damage the integrity of the award. If you can just go to a store, buy a Purple Heart, wear it on your jacket, and never even have to serve in the military in the first place, that damages the integrity of the award. It makes the award special. False claims make the award less valuable to actual recipients. In making this decision, I would cite the precedent of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, a similar Supreme Court case where an elected official sued a newspaper for printing false statements about his police
![majortests.com](http://patterns.studymode.com/1.11/dist/images/logos/major-tests/logo-major-tests-large.png)