Recently, Congress passed the Stolen Valor Act, which made it a federal offense for anyone to lie about receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor. A man giving a speech falsely tells his audience he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for service in Iraq. The man is charged under the Act. The prosecutors argue that the law is necessary to preserve the prestige of such a high honor. The man argues that the government is suppressing his free speech rights through this Act.

Point for Discussion: The courts are often forced to balance competing interests in reaching a decision. Which side do you think has the better argument? Can you think of ways that the Act can be amended to further the interest of the Act, without infringing on freedom of speech?

- your own words

-cite sources