That view was put to the test in a case decided this
week by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In a 2-to-1 decision, the court
upheld the constitutionality of a Virginia statute barring the impersonation of
a police officer.
The case stemmed from an incident in 2009 when
Douglas Chappell was stopped for speeding and falsely told a U.S. Park Police
officer that he was a deputy sheriff. In fact, Chappell was no longer employed
as an officer.
In upholding Chappell’s conviction in the case, the
4th Circuit noted language in the Alvarez case in which the justices made a
clear distinction between lies and criminal impersonation.
“The Court recognized, for example, the general
validity of laws prohibiting ‘the false representation that one is speaking as
a government official or on behalf of the government,’” Judge Harvie Wilkinson
wrote in the majority opinion.
“Falsely identifying oneself as a policeman in order
to get out of a speeding ticket is simply not the kind of expressive conduct
the Framers of our first and one of our greatest amendments had in mind,”
Wilkinson wrote.
Judge James Wynn saw it differently in his dissent.
In Wynn’s view, the Virginia statute was too broad
to be upheld. Courts have frequently struck down statutes that are so broad
that they prohibit speech or conduct beyond the reach of government.
Wynn acknowledges that the state has an interest in
preventing the impersonation of officers, but can do it in a narrowly tailored
way that would prohibit only efforts to deceive for criminal purposes.
The Virginia statue would apply to “not only someone
asserting that he is a police officer in the hopes of avoiding a ticket, but
also among other things: children playing cops and robbers on the front lawn;
trainees at a police academy role playing; and actors in plays in which peace
officers are characters,” Wynn wrote.
Wynn went on to suggest that someone in a bar
falsely bragging about being a police officer or lying as part of a political
campaign could be punished under the Virginia law.
It’s a spirited dissent that challenges conventional
wisdom about the constitutionality of police-impersonation laws.
One distinction from the military bragging in
Alvarez, of course, is that police officers have a current ongoing role in
society; military heroes do not. Consider the way even speed-limit-abiding
drivers adjust their driving when a police car is parked at the curb. A police
officer walking into a public place inevitably causes anxiety for some and
brings comfort to others.
There’s certainly a strong argument that citizens
have a right to know whether the person sitting next to them on that bar stool
has the power to take them into custody or whether they can turn to that bar
mate for protection if violence breaks out. Even when off duty, police officers
are “on.”
About the author: Ken Paulson is president and chief executive officer of the First Amendment Center. Previously, Paulson served as editor and senior vice president/news of USA Today and USATODAY.com.
This article was published by the First Amendment
Center.
No comments:
Post a Comment