Abel Field Case Analysis

In this case a man named Abel Fields falsely said that he worked in the military for eight years. He also claimed that he had earned a purple heart which you only earn if are wounded in battle. This man never served in the military so everything he said was false. He was making these claims in a public safety meeting, he told the public that they should listen to him because of his experience. He was then arrested for impersonating a military officer. He now is facing a year in prison and a fine of 1,000 dollars. The first court that he went to he argued that he was protected under the first amendment because he was expressing himself and determined he was not guilty. The case is now being heard by the Supreme Court of Justice to decide his fate.
I think that Abel Fields should be guilty for impersonating a military officer. When you work in the military you give a lot of things up, like your life with your family and friends. Abel Fields did give any of this up or sacrifice anything. He never served in the military. He used a lie to make his opinion more valuable. Why should we let …show more content…
v. Sullivan. The newspaper published a page accusing the police of Alabama for arresting Mather Luther king Jr for political reasons and not for breaking the law. The ad was not true, Sullivan sued and won. Most of the time when someone lies you have to prove how this lie caused harm. In this case Sullivan did not have to prove that anyone was hurt. The newspaper said that they were protected by the First Amendment; but the Supreme Court ruled that lies are not protected under the First Amendment. I think this ruling sets precedent for what is covered under the First Amendment when it comes to false claims. It really helped with ruling in the Abel Fields case because Abel Fields claimed that he was protected under the First Amendment; but in the case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan it shows that lies are not protected under the First