In somewhat dated news, the Denver Post reports here that a Colorado judge last week ruled that the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional in US v. Strandlof. The Denver Post stated that
A federal judge in Denver has ruled that the Stolen Valor Act is “facially unconstitutional” because it violates free speech, and he dismissed the criminal case against Rick Strandlof, a man who lied about being an Iraq war veteran.
U.S. District Judge Robert E. Blackburn issued his decision Friday [July 16] and rejected the prosecution’s argument that lying about having military medals dilutes their meaning and significance.
“This wholly unsubstantiated assertion is, frankly, shocking and, indeed, unintentionally insulting to the profound sacrifices of military personnel the Stolen Valor Act purports to honor,” Blackburn wrote. “To suggest that the battlefield heroism of our servicemen and women is motivated in any way, let alone in a compelling way, by considerations of whether a medal may be awarded simply defies my comprehension.”
I guess the judge thinks that the military is different and Art. 134, paragraph 113 is one of those uniquely military offenses, though it isn’t discussed in the opinion. See decision here, Volokh Conspiracy commentary here, and Eugene Volokh’s amicus brief supporting the Act here.