Editor-in-Chief, RealTechNews
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Friday struck down a California law that restricted the sale of violent video games to minors, declaring it unconstitutional, and affirming an earlier District Court ruling.
The law was signed by California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in October 2005 but was immediately challenged by the video game industry and thus never went into effect.
Besides prohibiting the sale of a “violent video game” to a minor, the law also called for “violent video game” entering California to be labeled with a solid white “18″ outlined in black.
In the ruling (.PDF), the three Justice panel unanimously ruled that the law as written violates both the First and Fourteenth amendments.
California had argued that the restrictions were necessary to prevent psychological and neurological harm to minors who play violent video games. But the panel ruled that the state had not provided evidence supporting such harm, saying:
Under strict scrutiny, the State has not produced substantial evidence that supports the Legislature’s conclusion that violent video games cause psychological or neurological harm to minors. Even if it did, the Act is not narrowly tailored to prevent that harm and there remain less restrictive means of forwarding the State’s purported interests, such as the improved ESRB rating system, enhanced educational campaigns, and parental controls.
Bo Andersen, president and CEO of the Entertainment Merchants Association, which had challenged the law, issued the following statement, which expressed obvious agreement with the decision but also urged California to not pursue the matter further:
“We are extremely gratified by the court’s rejection of video game censorship by the state of California. The ruling vindicates what we have said since the bill that became this law was introduced: ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content.
“I understand that some government officials will push for the state to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review this decision. The state should not acquiesce in this demand, particularly in light of its budget difficulties. The state has already wasted too many tax dollars, at least $283,000 at last count, on this ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism.”
However, State Senator Leland Yee, author of the bill, said he will urge California Attorney General Jerry Brown to take the matter to the Supreme Court.
“I’ve always contended that the … law the governor signed was a good one for protecting children from the harm from playing these ultra-violent video games. I’ve always felt it would end up in the Supreme Court.”
What idiots. This country is run by the courts and the legislatures are just fine with that. I wonder how the courts would react if the “conservatives” started have public executions.
If they want to talk about unconstitutional it is the courts usurping the powers granted to the legislature.
Umm… So they wrote a bad law based on “think of the children” scare tactics with all the evidence indicating that there is no harm to the children by the products they’re “protecting” them from and a court decides that the really bad law also violates two amendments of the constitution of this country, and you call the courts “idiots”? Maybe you should read the constitution some time. Look at the checks and balances this country was set up with and you’ll see that this court didn’t “usurp” anything, but did exactly what it was intended to do by the people who put the system in place when this country started.