Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
United States v. Alvarez , 567 U.S. 709 (2012), is a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 was unconstitutional. The Stolen Valor Act of 2005 was a federal law that criminalized false statements about having a military medal.
The Stolen Valor Act of 2005, signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 20, 2006, [1] was a U.S. law that broadened the provisions of previous U.S. law addressing the unauthorized wear, manufacture, or sale of any military decorations and medals.
The legal rule itself – how to apply this exception – is complicated, as it is often dependent on who said the statement and which actor it was directed towards. [6] The analysis is thus different if the government or a public figure is the target of the false statement (where the speech may get more protection) than a private individual who is being attacked over a matter of their private ...
Prosecutors say Alvarez owned and ran the Bronx-based company ATAX New York, which they described as a “high-volume tax preparation company.” The company prepared about 90,000 federal income ...
Mendez's ruling argues that the law, which is aimed at cracking down on "deepfakes" and other forms of false speech intended at misrepresenting an opponent's views and actions, ends up making ...
After 8 rounds, YouTube content creator Jake Paul bested a 58-year-old Mike Tyson in a live boxing faceoff on Netflix on Friday, Nov. 15, 2024.
Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, false statements of fact, and commercial ...
United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the respondent's forcible abduction from a foreign country, despite the existence of an extradition treaty with said country, does not prohibit him from being tried before a U.S. court for violations of American criminal laws.