ad 1
ad 1
ad 1
ad 1
move to previous move to next
About JW's Media Group   |   Go to Postcards   |   Go to JW.com   |   Sign up for eNewsletter
Download the Media Review   |   JW in the News   |   100 Years of History

Steve Fogle's Feature

Steve Fogle
Steve Fogle's Feature

Valor Cannot Be Stolen


Recently the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case of United States v. Alvarez concerning whether Xavier Alvarez can be criminally punished for claiming military awards he did not earn. Just as we saw when the Court reviewed the Westboro church members picketing military funerals, the Court should look beyond the immediate, emotional reaction to the abhorrent nature of his actions and decide whether this is protected speech. Once again, we should expect the Court to say that it is.

Should we expect a different outcome? Not if we look at other examples of hateful, insulting and shocking speech that have been allowed to remain in our marketplace of ideas. Which is worse in the following scenarios? Insinuating a preacher's first sexual experience was with his Mother in an outhouse or claiming to be a combat veteran who earned the Medal of Honor; allowing convicted felons to profit from their misdeeds by publishing detailed, gory accounts of their crimes, or fabricating a military record to make you a more attractive candidate for office; stating that policemen are in league with known gangsters, or failing to correct someone who introduces you as having placed your life on the line in the service of your country?

It's a catch-22, of course. Some would argue these questions compare apples to oranges. Perhaps, but the similarity I see is this: we don't change reality by misstating it. Someone who lies may create the appearance of a new reality, but it's up to the listener to test the metal of its existence.

We have not lost our ability to question the information being touted, but it does appear sometimes that we fail to exercise it.

That idea seems lost in the flurry of our daily life, when statements of reported fact come fast and furious, leaving little time to digest, consider and decide whether we can believe those "facts" or not. The real danger is that perception of reality can be mistaken for reality, and in today's society, often is. Once a parish priest is rumored to have had improper contact with young children, is there ever a time when he is free of that stigma? How often have we seen politicians shy away from the spotlight under unconfirmed rumors of their (insert your idea of unacceptable behavior)? Is there really a "4G" that is better than a "3G"………or any "G" at all? We have not lost our ability to question the information being touted, but it does appear sometimes that we fail to exercise it.

The point is that even when we are drinking information from a fire hose, we must never lose our ability to be active listeners. We should question what we hear, and remind ourselves that it's not a fact just because someone says it's so. Until we can verify it by objective proof, it is only what someone has said. In that vein, I argue that this "stolen valor" case is not about theft, but about someone who felt they could get away with a lie and failed because an active listener questioned the speech.

There is no war hero walking around without his or her rightfully earned valor because of Mr. Alvarez. The true heroes are among us and most of them don't want or need to bring it to our attention. Remove the emotion from this discussion and it's easy to accept that this law punishes speech and should be declared unconstitutional. Laws should punish actions, not words.

Steve Fogle is a partner at Jackson Walker. He can be reached at sfogle@jw.com.