In the fictional stolen valor act case of us v. fields, fields argued that his lie was intentional. protected by free speech. damaging to soldiers. unintentional.

In the fictional Stolen Valor Act case of US v. Fields, Fields argued that his lie was “protected by free speech”. Abel Fields was trialed for violating the Stolen Valor Act passed by congress in 2006. According to the act, anyone that lies about having received a decoration from the US military force, would be trialed and if convicted would be imprisoned.  

Fields was convicted and he appealed the decision by arguing that the Act was against the First Amendment that protected freedom of speech.  

Its not what the other guy said

Explanation:

i think it is the third one.