October Term 2011 · Docket 11-210
Can Congress criminalize false claims of military honors?
The dispute centers on whether the Stolen Valor Act violates free speech by punishing false statements about military service.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
General Verrilli argued that military honors sustain core national values.
He stated that Congress has a long tradition of protecting the honors system.
Mr. Libby argued that the Stolen Valor Act criminalizes pure speech.
He noted that the law punishes lies regardless of the context or audience.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-27
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the limits of federal power to punish lies about military decorations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 22, 2012.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
The government seeks to uphold the law to protect the integrity of military honors.
The defendant seeks to strike down the law to protect free speech from government punishment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
What each side says
The government argues that protecting the military honors system is a vital national interest.
The defendant argues that the law criminalizes pure speech without any tangible harm.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if the government claims no value exists for false speech.
Justice Ginsburg asked if the law would ban false claims of service without decorations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-27
Why it matters
This case defines the boundary between government regulation and individual expression. It determines whether citizens can speak falsely about military service without facing federal prison. The outcome shapes the scope of free speech protections in public discourse.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 3-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 3-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-27
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-49
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.