This Court historically has expressed that not all speech or acts of speech are protected by free speech clause the First Amendment. The immediate question is whether or not the act of lying which violates a federal criminal statute, the Stolen Valor Act of 2005. 18 U. S. C. §704 joins such limitations. I declare that it does not. Furthermore, this court affirms that the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 is unconstitutional. Abel Fields was charged in the District of Alaska with one count of falsely representing himself as a recipient of a military of honor in violation of the Stolen Valor Act of 2005. Mr. Fields moved to dismiss on the grounds that the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 violated his First Amendment rights to free speech. The district court denied this motion. Mr. Fields then appealed to U.S. Court of Appeals for the…show more content… It is held that the respondent be dissolved of all criminal charges. No part of the government be it local, state, or federal reserves the right to indict an individual for falsely claiming to have received a military honor for no other purpose but to bolster his or her ego. The notion that this is a criminal act is a dangerous precedent in creating a dystopian future. With the same logic that crafted the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 we must then charge every man who ever told a woman in a bar he was a doctor when he wasn’t and every student who ever told her parents that she got a grade A on her test when she didn’t. Said man did not put in the gruelling years at medical school to earn the honor of being called a doctor, and said student didn’t study greatly each night as her fellow classmates that did earn a respectable grade A. Therefore, in this and any such hypothetical circumstance there is no crime committed lest it be accompanied by a crime of, for
