Question

understanding the majority opinion
laws that prevent harmful false speech center on lies told about others. a lie that is told about another person can be difficult to reverse. it can permanently damage that persons reputation and well - being. however, a lie told about oneself and ones own accomplishments is easier to reverse through other speech. indeed, in mr. fieldss case, an effective way to reverse mr. fieldss falsehoods is to simply point out his lie. the first amendment empowers the public to use its own free speech in response to mr. fields. a law is unnecessary.
why does the justice object to the enforcement of the stolen valor act?
laws must not prevent false speech about others.
laws making it a crime to tell lies about oneself are not needed.
it is not possible to reverse a lie through other speech.
lies told about others are less serious than lies told about oneself.

Explanation:

The text explains that lies about oneself (like Mr. Fields' falsehoods) can be reversed through other speech. The First Amendment allows the public to use free speech to counter such lies. So, a law (Stolen Valor Act) making it a crime to tell lies about oneself is unnecessary as there's an effective way (other speech) to reverse the lie.

Answer:

Laws making it a crime to tell lies about oneself are not needed.