Essay 1 Stolen Valor
According to Stolen Valor Act of 2013, any person found guilty of claiming to be a recipient of military decorations or medals has committed a federal crime. Xavier Alvarez is one such person that opted to declare himself of winning a congressional medal of honour, a claim that could not be supported by the character and history. The claims of winning are against the law. The Act expressly states that the punishment awarded to such individuals is paramount. The charge for such an offence is imprisoned to 6 months. However, if fraud committed is about the medal of honour the person liable is imprisoned up to one year.
Xavier’s scenario appears under two cases. First, there is a claim about winning the medal of honour. Second, there is an attempt to consider freedom of speech. Looking at the two points, there is a possibility to rule in favour or against the defendant. The law entitles individuals with the right to speech. Meaning a person may make any speech as long as he does not infringe the rights of other people. However, the right may be limited in such instances as when the freedom is misused. Therefore, a majority of people may consider the law.
In this case, as the Supreme Court justice I would consider the case as a criminal offence. Xavier went against the law by falsifying circumstances. The claim that he has won a medal to make it worse a military medal of honour is paramount to punishment as an exception to the first amendment. Stolen Valor Act of 2013 signed by the then president Barack Obama provides grounds upon which a person can be convicted as a lawbreaker. In this case, Xavier is a lawbreaker, all the actions pertain to the Act, and the judgement is passed according to the grounds therein. Hence, I convict Xavier and sentence him to a one-year imprisonment.
Useful LinksFree Essays About Blog
If you have any queries please write to us
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2023