The Stolen Valor Act, passed by Congress in 2005, made is illegal for anyone to falsely claim, verbally or in writing, to have been awarded a U.S. military decoration. Last week, the Supreme Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment’s protection of free speech. The ruling by six Supreme Court justices proved that they simply do not understand how lying works in real life.
Lies must lead directly to fraud
The majority opinion in United States v. Alvarez, written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, said that the Constitution does not allow speech to be prohibited solely because of its content—the message or ideas expressed. In other words, people are allowed to say anything they want, with a few exceptions, including obscenity, child pornography, threats and fraud.
Kennedy points out that “the First Amendment requires that there be a direct causal link between the restriction imposed and the injury to be prevented.” He says that that the government may restrict speech where “false claims are made to effect a fraud or secure moneys or other valuable consideration, say, offers of employment.”
In other words, if a person lies to the Veterans Administration about receiving a military medal in order to receive higher disability benefits or a bigger pension, that’s illegal. But if a person claims to be a hero in a public meeting, as Xavier Alvarez did, without receiving an identifiable benefit directly as a result of the lie, then it’s not illegal.
Lies cause little harm
A concurring opinion was written by Justice Stephen Breyer and joined by Justice Elena Kagan. They agreed that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional, but for different reasons. They believed that the law harmed First Amendment rights, and the government could achieve its objective of protecting military honors through other means. In other words, the Stolen Valor Act was the legal equivalent of swatting a fly with a sledgehammer.
The problem, Justice Breyer wrote, was that the Stolen Valor Act made the act of lying about medals illegal, without demanding that someone be harmed by the lies. Breyer stated:
As written, [the Stolen Valor Act] applies in family, social, or other private contexts, where lies will often cause little harm.
Lying about military honors causes little harm in social contexts? Excuse me?
James Montgomery’s lies
My ex-husband, James Montgomery, told me that he had won the Victoria Cross, which is the Australian equivalent of the Congressional Medal of Honor, for his heroism in Vietnam. He claimed he was still in the Australian military, assigned to U.S. Special Forces. He showed me documents to back up his claims.
Montgomery didn’t only make these claims to me. He was active in the local chapter of the Vietnam Veterans Organization. He was the keynote speaker at a Veterans Day ceremony, and twice I accompanied him as he told a classroom full of school children about his military service, including how sad he was when his buddies were killed.
It was all a lie. James Montgomery was never in the military.
Montgomery lied in a “family or social context.” Did I suffer harm? You bet. James Montgomery took $227,000 from me, telling me the money was for his “businesses.” He spent much of it entertaining other women. In our divorce, Montgomery was ordered to pay all my money back, plus $1 million in punitive damages for fraud.
Did I get the money? No—I only recovered $517. I had to declare bankruptcy.
I was not the only person Montgomery swindled. I know for sure that he took large amounts of money from at least five other women, and suspect that he took money from many others as well. I know of at least one businessman who lost $100,000. I know American Express tried to sue him, and many credit card companies wrote off his debts.
I also know that James Montgomery is not an isolated case.
Lovefraud Romantic Partner survey results
All sociopaths lie. And, as I discovered while researching my book, Red Flags of Love Fraud—10 signs you’re dating a sociopath, 10 percent of respondents to the Lovefraud Romantic Partner Survey said that the sociopaths they encountered lied about being in the military or Special Forces.
So what happened to these survey respondents? Many of them lost money, just like me. The 114 survey respondents who said the sociopath they encountered falsely claimed to be military lost the following amounts:
- Under $5,000 18%
- $5,000 – $9,999 10%
- $10,000 – $49,999 25%
- $50,000 – $99,999 18%
- $100,000 – $499,999 19%
- More than $500,000 11%
What else happened to these unsuspecting targets?
- 32% lost their home
- 67% incurred debt
- 37% were physically abused or injured
- 44% had their lives threatened
- 28% considered or attempted suicide
- 26% had lawsuits filed against them
- 16% had criminal charges filed against them
Intention to mislead
Sociopaths lie about military service, and military decorations, intending to deceive, mislead and ultimately harm their targets. How does this work?
Most Americans have high regard for members of the military. We recognize that our men and women in uniform put themselves in harm’s way to protect the rest of us. These brave individuals do the difficult and often deadly work of preserving our freedom and protecting our way of life. For that, we honor and respect them.
When sociopaths claim to be military, their goal is to assume the mantle of respect and honor that that we confer upon true members of the military. These predators portray themselves as military so that we believe they can be trusted.
I suppose there are some people who simply engage in idle boasting when they claim military honors, and their lies, as Justice Breyer wrote, cause little harm. But I’m sure that many, many military impostors engage in their reprehensible behavior with a distinct agenda. They are lying in order to pull off a scam.
But it is not necessarily a direct cause-and-effect relationship. The fakers don’t necessarily lie to steal the benefits awarded to those who truly did earn the medals. Rather, the fakers lie to create a false perception that they are responsible and trustworthy, so that they can then steal money or other valuable commodities from the rest of us.
The justices’ view of the relationship between lies and harm is simplistic. Sociopaths are extremely sophisticated in how they use their lying and manipulation to take advantage of others. And now, because of the Supreme Court’s ruling, they can do it with impunity.
DONNA, thank you, thank you, THANK you for writing this article. Thank you.
This is precisely what I have been yammering on about for the past 6 years. My eldest son has perpetrated “Stolen Valor,” and it diminishes the true courage and sacrifice of all of those men and women who will NEVER have a normal life, again, or ever see another sunrise.
My son’s activities have procured a very, VERY healthy disability payment, for life, and the “injuries” that he experienced were self-inflicted. He never saw a DAY of combat, much less infantry training – he never left Walter Reed Army Medical Center during his 3-year enlistment. But, he has been able to convince people that he served in combat, is a decorated combat Veteran, and has the forged documentation to back up his claims.
THIS IS A HORRIBLE CRIME. Perpetrators of “Stolen Valor” take money out of taxpayer pockets, steal the integrity of actual Veterans, and diminish ANY honor that Veterans have rightly earned.
SHAME on the Supreme Court Justices. SHAME on them.
Claims about military honors aside, where on Earth did the Justices get the idea that “in family, social, or other private contexts, where lies will often cause little harm”?
Will often cause little harm? Excuse me?
What planet have they been living on?
I agree with Truthspeak.
SHAME on the Supreme Court Justices. SHAME on them all.
Once again, the education is so sorely needed.
G1S, this has really triggered my hackles because there is GREAT harm in these lies. There is economic harm. There is social/cultural harm, and there is the deliberate dismantling of honor and courage of the REAL men and women who have lost limbs, hearing, sanity, and (far too often) their lives by doing what was expected of them, even when they didn’t want to.
Education IS sorely needed – and, that’s my personal mandate to have some part in getting “the word out” about the collateral damage of socipathic/pathological lying.
More gutteral noises………..grrrrrrrrrrr…..hiss……spit
Hi to All,
I have been reading this blog nearly every day for the past couple of months. It has been really helpful to me. I have been the target of many spaths and mn’s during my life, as I was “raised” by one (my mother). They are attracted to me like moths to a flame. My most recent encounter was with a spath surgeon, and I allowed him to operate on me, even though there was a palpable evil presence about him! That experience, which happened about 8 months ago, was very traumatizing, as he did victimize me in ways I will not go into right now. This was for me the straw that broke the camel’s back. I now understand that some people are hardly human at all, and that I am often manipulated through something called “the trauma bond”.
The “grey rock” concept–which I learned here– has helped/is helping me a lot. With some people, it is actually dangerous to shine. I do try to remember this in contacts with my mother.
I will post more about myself later. Probably in dribbles. Yes, I have major trust issues, even online.
I do agree with the posters here that this was a horrible ruling. In my opinion, we should give credit to the dissenting justices. Alito filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia and Thomas joined. If you want to read their actual opinion, it can be read here:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-210d4e9.pdf
The dissenting opinion begins on p 33. Truthspeak, Alito also addresses the issue of stolen-valor liars who use their lies for government benefits.
Blessings to all.
“Crazy Bob” the guy across the road where my husband’s plane crashed in a pasture owned by Bob, burned and killed my husband, and burned my son D and 2 others, sued me for $50K because “he (BOB) suffered emotional damage”—Bob had claimed when he moved here and bought that 30 acres that he was a CIA agent, worked for the FBI, had done 5,000 parachute jumps, and ya da ya da, and of course no one believed him….but he eventually convinced the VA that he suffered PTSD and got a full military disability pension….of course he laughed and told the neighbors how he had conned the VA into this…and my x BF also mentioned that he had a full military disability pension for PTSD as well, which he had learned to fake the symptoms of. So I think there are a lot of folks who may have served in the military for a little while who fake disabililties for pensions…as well as those who have never serv ed who try to claim honors in order to puff up their resumes for their abiliity to defraud others.
Lying in order to puff up your resume ought to be a crime even if it isn’t.
OxD…..hang on a second. “Crazy Bob” actually killed and burned your husband, son, and others????? Omigod…how did he get away with it?!?! Omigosh……that’s unspeakable.
Lying for accolades – happens all the time. And, it’s despicable.
Let me clarify: killed your husband, and burned him, your son, and others…….I’m simply horror-struck, OxD. How on earth do you manage your experiences?! Gosh, gosh, gosh…..
No, Truthy. The plane crashed in “crazy Bob’s’ feild and it killed Oxy’s husband and burned the others. Crazy Bob didn’t kill them, but he did collect as a result of it.
Lost another post…….
Kim, thanks for clarifying that for me. It still doesn’t lessen the horror of OxD’s tragic loss for me and the absolute vile greed of Crazy Bob for capitalizing on someone’s unspeakable tragedy.
Sanata,
Thanks for that link. It was good to read the opinions.
But what’s this about “false factual statements”? Maybe I’m splitting hairs, but isn’t that an oxymoron? A factual statement is something that is a fact, i.e., is the truth.
I can see “false statements” presented as “facts,” but “false factual statements” cannot exist.
What about perjury? Why isn’t that mentioned?
My son’s P father has presented false statements to the courts (I was present and heard them) as well as to Medicare to get himself declared disabled in order to avoid paying child support.
My attorney subpoenaed his medical records. Know what we got? Page of financial ledger entries that had no headers. In other words, no medical information whatsoever and the financial information could have applied to “Any Person USA.”
Then true to being a P, Daddy Dearest claimed that he had complied.
I believe it was Gavin de Becker (could be wrong on this source) who said that one of the more prevalent red flags of con men are claims not only to military service (a high rank within the military, of coures) but multiple medals that they had received.
My point is that these things, claiming a military background, experience, and rank that did not exist plus claims to medals, are already recognized as common con tactics.
Where does the Supreme Court get its information from? It sounds to me like they’re pulling their “facts” from out of a hat.