GovTrack’s Bill Summary
We don’t have a summary available yet.
H.R. 258: Stolen Valor Act of 2013
- Introduced:
- Jan 15, 2013 (113th Congress, 2013–2015)
- Sponsor:
- Rep. Joseph Heck [R-NV3]
- Status:
- At President
The bill’s title was written by the bill’s sponsor. H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.
- Full Title
To amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to fraudulent representations about having received military decorations or medals.
- Summary
-
No summaries available.
- Text
-
Last updated May 20, 2013.
4 pages
- Primary Source
-
View on THOMAS (The Library of Congress)
GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here.
- Citation
-
Click a format for a citation suggestion:
Library of Congress Summary
The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.
1/15/2013--Introduced.
Stolen Valor Act of 2013 - Amends the federal criminal code to rewrite provisions relating to fraudulent claims about military service to subject to a fine, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both an individual who, with intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit, fraudulently holds himself or herself out to be a recipient of: a Congressional Medal of Honor, a distinguished-service cross, a Navy cross, an Air Force cross, a silver star, a Purple Heart, a Combat Infantryman's Badge, a Combat Action Badge, a Combat Medical Badge, a Combat Action Ribbon, a Combat Action Medal, or any replacement or duplicate medal for such medal as authorized by law.
House Republican Conference Summary
The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.
This summary can be found at http://www.gop.gov/bill/113/1/hr258.
Background
In 2006, Congress passed the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-437), which included a provision making it illegal to falsely represent oneself as having been awarded a military decoration or medal.
In 2012, the Supreme Court held in United States v. Alvarez that the Act was unconstitutional as it violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment. The case involved a California man who had falsely claimed that he had been awarded the Medal of Honor and was convicted of violating the Stolen Valor Act. In a 6-3 decision, Justice Kennedy wrote for a plurality that the Act violated a strict scrutiny test, as it was not narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest, nor was it done in the least restrictive means possible.[1] However, only four Justices joined in Justice Kennedy’s opinion. Justice Breyer, joined by Justice Kagan, wrote in a concurrence that false statements of fact only had to pass an intermediate scrutiny test. The Act still failed this test, however, because the Government could not show that it would apply to situations that would cause real harm. In his concurring opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote, “The Government has provided no convincing explanation as to why a more finely tailored statute would not work…such a statute could significantly reduce the threat of First Amendment harm while permitting the statute to achieve its important protective objective.”[2]
By applying only to fraudulent claims with intent to tangibly benefit, H.R. 258 more narrowly tailors the law to apply to cases that cause real harm. In this way, H.R. 258 takes the suggestions contained in the Court’s opinions and incorporates them into the law, making it more likely to survive constitutional scrutiny.
The House passed similar legislation in the 112th Congress on September 13, 2012 by a vote of 410-3 (Roll no. 575).
Summary
H.R. 258 amends the federal criminal code (18 U.S.C. §704) to subject anyone who fraudulently claims to be a recipient of certain military honors, with intent to “obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit,” to a fine, imprisonment of not more than one year, or both. The bill also adds “combat badges” to the list of protected military honors and removes the term "wears".
Cost
CBO estimates that H.R. 258, “would have no significant cost to the federal government. Enacting the bill could affect direct spending and revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any effects would be insignificant for each year.”
House Democratic Caucus Summary
The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.
So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.
We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.
The bill contains the following citations to other parts of U.S. law:
United States Code
The United States Code is the compilation of permanent laws enacted by Congress. Temporary and other non-permanent laws do not appear in the United States Code. (About half of the United States Code is the law itself, called positive law. The other half is merely a compilation of the laws but has no legal significance.)
- Title 18: CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- Part I: CRIMES
- Chapter 33: EMBLEMS, INSIGNIA, AND NAMES
- Section 704: Military medals or decorations