3Purple Hearts and two Bronze Stars. As a result of winning the award, Glock flew Defendantand his wife to Las Vegas, Nevada to attend the 2008 Shot Show, where Defendant wasintroduced in front of hundreds of people as the 2008 Glock Hero Award recipient. In additionto paying for the airfare and lodging for Defendant and his wife, Glock gave Defendant a trophyand two Glock Semi-automatic pistols. In all, Defendant and his wife received approximately$3500 in benefits for winning the award. Sometime thereafter it was discovered thatDefendant’s representations were completely false. Although he did serve in the military,including a tour of duty in Iraq, he was never injured in combat, was never recognized for acts of heroism and was never awarded a Silver Star, a Purple Heart, or a Bronze Star.Defendant is charged with violating subsection (b) of the Act which provides that[w]hoever falsely represents himself or herself, verbally or in writing, tohave been awarded any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for theArmed Forces of the United States, any of the service medals or badgesawarded to the members of such forces, the ribbon, button, or rosette of anysuch badge, decoration, or medal, or any colorable imitation of such item shallbe fined under this title, imprisoned not more than six months, or both.18 U.S.C. §704(b). The penalty is enhanced to one year in prison if the decoration involved isthe Congressional Medal of Honor, a distinguished-service cross, a Navy cross, an Air Forcecross, a silver star, or a Purple Heart. 18 U.S.C. §704(c) (d). If convicted, Defendant would beeligible for the enhanced penalty.The Act is clearly a content-based regulation of speech. It regulates words about aspecific subject: military honors. Content-based restrictions on speech are ordinarily subjectedto the strict scrutiny standard of review.
See United States v. Playboy Entm’t Group, Inc.,
529U.S. 808, 813 (2000);
617 F.3d at 1202
The Supreme Court, however, has recognizedexceptions to this general rule for “certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech,the prevention and punishment of which has never been thought to raise any Constitutional
Case 8:11-cr-00475-PJM Document 8 Filed 08/29/11 Page 3 of 9