This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)

This article needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications. Primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please add more appropriate citations from reliable sources. (November 2008)

Please help improve this article by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page. (January 2007)

Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits lying to or (concealing information) from a federal official. The purpose of the statute is to "punish those who render positive false statements designed to pervert or undermine functions of governmental departments and agencies" (United States v. Harrison, 1985).

The statute spells out this purpose in subsection (a), which states:

§ 1001. Statements or entries generally

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully--

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;

(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or

(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry...

Even constitutionally explicit Fifth Amendment privileges do not exonerate affirmative false statements. United States v. Wong, 431 U.S.C. 174, 178, 52 L. Ed. 2d 231, 97 S. Ct. 1823 (1977). As the Court in Wong said, "Our legal system provides methods for challenging the Government's right to ask questions -- lying is not one of them." Id., at 180, quoting Bryson v. United States, 396 U.S. 64, 72, 24 L. Ed. 2d 264, 90 S. Ct. 355 (1969).

However, some federal courts have said that § 1001 does not to apply to in-court statements. Courts have largely relied on the fact that perjury statutes cover in-court statements, and have stated that the conventions of courtroom advocacy might create many ambiguous, borderline cases in which application of § 1001 could harm other important interests, such as rights of the criminal defendant. United States v. North, 708 F. Supp. 380