Statements (158)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
February 22, 2012
False claims of military service |
| gptkbp:argument_location |
gptkb:Washington,_D._C.
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Analyzed under strict scrutiny standard
Analysis of the case outcome. Relevant in discussions of constitutional rights. Evaluation of the case's impact on law. Frequently analyzed in constitutional law courses. Implications for future free speech cases. Part of case law regarding free speech. Used as a case study in legal education. |
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial outcome and its implications.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_discussion |
Discussion on the judicial outcome and its implications.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial outcome discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_impact |
Impact of the judicial outcome on future cases.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of the judicial outcome.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_outcome_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial outcome impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_review_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial review impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial significance of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_discussion |
Discussion on the judicial significance of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial significance discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_impact |
Impact of the judicial significance on legal discussions.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of judicial significance.
|
| gptkbp:case_judicial_significance_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the judicial significance impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_context_analysis |
Analysis of the legal context of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_context_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal context discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_context_impact |
Impact on the legal context of free speech.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_context_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of the legal context.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_context_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal context impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_debate_analysis |
Analysis of the legal debate surrounding the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_debate_discussion |
Discussion on the legal debate surrounding the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_debate_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal debate discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_discussion |
Discussion on the legal ramifications of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_framework_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal framework discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_framework_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of the legal framework.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_framework_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal framework impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_impact_analysis |
Analysis of the legal impact of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the legal impact of the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_outcome_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of the legal outcome.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_outcome_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal outcome impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_precedent_analysis |
Analysis of the legal precedent set by the case.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_precedent_impact |
Impact of the legal precedent on future legislation.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_precedent_impact_discussion |
Discussion on the impact of legal precedent.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_precedent_impact_discussion_analysis |
Analysis of the legal precedent impact discussion.
|
| gptkbp:case_legal_significance_analysis |
Analysis of the significance of the case in law.
|
| gptkbp:case_number |
Documented in legal databases.
11-210 A landmark case on free speech rights. Summary available in legal literature. |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
5-4 ruling
Set limits on government regulation of speech Impact on future legislation regarding speech. Emphasized the importance of free speech False statements do not cause harm to others Reinforced the principle of free expression Struck down the Stolen Valor Act Majority opinion emphasized free speech protections Impact on public perception of free speech. Struck down the Stolen Valor Act. Ruling emphasized the protection of individual rights. Majority opinion emphasized the value of free speech. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Important for First Amendment jurisprudence
Significant for its implications on free speech rights. Analysis of the significance of the case. Judicial significance in the realm of free speech. Significance in the context of constitutional law. |
| gptkbp:case_study_reference |
Referenced in case studies on free speech.
|
| gptkbp:case_types |
Constitutional law case
|
| gptkbp:consequences |
Influenced future cases on free speech
Implications for future legislation on speech Implications for laws regulating speech. Legal impact on future speech regulations. |
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 28, 2012 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas Concern over false statements undermining military honors Dissenting opinion raised concerns about false claims. |
| gptkbp:election |
6-3
|
| gptkbp:held_in |
False statements are protected speech under the First Amendment
|
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Debate over military honor and free speech
|
| gptkbp:historical_significance |
Significant in the context of First Amendment jurisprudence.
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
United States v. Alvarez
|
| gptkbp:impact |
Influenced future cases on free speech
Influenced discussions on free speech and military honors. |
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
Alvarez and the United States
|
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
gptkb:567_U._S._709
Frequently referenced in legal arguments. 567 U. S. 709 (2012) |
| gptkbp:judged_by |
Judgment favored the defendant's free speech rights.
|
| gptkbp:judges |
Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Roberts
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Struck down as unconstitutional
Alito, Thomas, Scalia Constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act Analysis of the outcome of judicial review. Analysis of the judicial review discussion. Discussion on the impact of judicial review. Impact on judicial review of free speech cases. Judicial review favored the defendant. Judicial scrutiny of government speech regulation. Judicial review emphasized free speech protections. Discussion on the judicial review process in the case. |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
gptkb:Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2005
Free speech under the First Amendment Context within First Amendment law. Discussion on the legal context of the case. |
| gptkbp:legal_discussion |
Discussion on the limits of free speech.
|
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Judicial outcome favored free speech.
Impact on the legal framework of free speech. Reaffirmed strong protection for free speech Part of the legal framework surrounding free speech. Analysis of the legal framework surrounding the case. Discussion on the analysis of the legal framework. Impact on judicial approaches to free speech. Influenced judicial approaches to free speech. Judicial outcome favored individual rights. Discussion on the legal framework established by the case. |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
First Amendment rights
Government's interest in protecting military honor Ongoing debate about truth in speech Debate surrounding the implications of the ruling. Debate over the balance between free speech and protecting military honors. |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
Invalidated the law against false claims of military service
Analysis of the legal outcomes and implications. Analysis of the legal outcomes of the case. Impact of the legal outcome on public perception. Reaffirmed the importance of free speech protections. |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
Government cannot criminalize false statements
|
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
Legal analysis of the case's arguments.
|
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Stolen_Valor_Act
gptkb:First_Amendment Free speech False statements |
| gptkbp:majority_reasoning |
Government cannot punish false speech without a compelling reason.
|
| gptkbp:material |
Alvarez falsely claimed military honors
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
Reversed lower court's decision
The Court ruled in favor of Alvarez |
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:United_States_v._Stevens
Established legal precedent for future cases. Limits on laws targeting false statements Set precedent for free speech cases False claims do not constitute unprotected speech Set precedent for future First Amendment cases. |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Anthony_Kennedy
|
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Mixed reactions from veterans and free speech advocates
Mixed reactions from veterans and free speech advocates. |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:United_States_v._O'_Brien
Influenced cases like United States v. Stevens Referenced in cases involving free speech. |
| gptkbp:related_to |
gptkb:Stolen_Valor_Act
|
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Analyzed in law reviews and academic papers.
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Clarified limits of government regulation of speech
First Amendment protection of false statements |
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
3
|