United States v. Robbins
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190
W.D. Va.2011Background
- Robbins is charged under 18 U.S.C. § 704(b) for falsely representing receipt of military decorations.
- He allegedly served 1972–1975 in the U.S. Army but did not serve overseas or earn medals.
- Robbins allegedly claimed Vietnam Service Medal and Vietnam Campaign Medal in campaign materials and wore related medals as part of a VFW honor guard.
- He allegedly provided altered documentation to the VFW and a local newspaper to support his claimed medals.
- Robbins moved to quash the indictment on First Amendment grounds, arguing § 704(b) violates free speech; the government contends false statements fall outside First Amendment protection.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 704(b) infringes the First Amendment as applied to false statements. | Robbins: statute criminalizes protected false statements. | Robbins: statute restricts protected speech; unconstitutional. | No; statute is constitutional when narrowly read to require knowingly false statements. |
| Whether § 704(b) should be read to require intent to deceive (mens rea). | Robbins: requires no intent to deceive. | Robbins: reading with intent avoids First Amendment problems. | Yes; statute read to require knowledge of falsity and intent to deceive. |
| Whether § 704(a) about wearing decorations is constitutional. | Robbins: separate provision may also be unconstitutional. | Statute aligns with protecting military honors and is within Congress's power. | Constitutional under the O'Brien test; regulation of expressive conduct related to military honors is valid. |
| Whether the speech restricted by the Stolen Valor Act falls outside First Amendment protection as not 'speech that matters'. | Robbins: truthful or ambiguous statements could be protected; chilling effects, etc. | False statements about earned decorations are not protected when knowingly false. | Properly limited, § 704(b) targets outright lies about military honors and is not protected. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (U.S. 1974) (false statements generally unprotected but some speech matters)
- Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1990) (clarified falsity exception to First Amendment protections)
- Sullivan v. New York Times Co., 376 U.S. 254 (U.S. 1964) (defamation balancing; public interest in truth)
- Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (U.S. 1988) (parody/hyperbole protection in First Amendment)
- Greenbelt Cooperative Publ. Ass'n v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (U.S. 1970) (protection of speech; limits on liability for rhetoric)
- O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (U.S. 1968) (intermediate scrutiny for regulation of expressive conduct)
- Schacht v. United States, 398 U.S. 58 (U.S. 1970) (analogous to military decorations and expressive conduct)
- United States v. Alvarez, 617 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2010) ( Ninth Circuit on Stolen Valor Act (discussed in decision))
- United States v. Strandlof, 746 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (D. Colo. 2010) (district court ruling on Stolen Valor Act)