Court Strikes Down Violent Game Law

If you ask me, it's no different than going to an art gallery that has naked women, or rap music that talks about shooting and killings, or a movie that is rated R and has naked people, explosions, etc.  It's a form of "art", video games are, and they are also protected by freedom of speech.

US supreme court

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the video games industry this morning in a case that called for the ban of violent games to children in the state of California. 

In a 7-2 decision, the court struck down the proposed law, saying video games fall under First Amendment protection. 

"Like protected books, plays, and movies, [video games] communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium. And 'the basic principles of freedom of speech . . . do not vary' with a new and different communication medium," said the court. 

"This country has no tradition of specially restricting children's access to depictions of violence. And California's claim that 'interactive' video games present special problems, in that the player participates in the violent action on screen and determines its out- come, is unpersuasive." 

A PDF version of the court's full decision can be found here. 

The proposed law was first signed in 2005 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. It opposed the sale of violent games to minors and could fine retailers up to $1,000 for each violation. A federal appeals court, however, blocked the law before it could pass, deeming it unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme decided in April 2010 to give the law a second look, making its decision this morning. 

"This is a historic and complete win for the First Amendment and the creative freedom of artists and storytellers everywhere. Today, the Supreme Court affirmed what we have always known – that free speech protections apply every bit as much to video games as they do to other forms of creative expression like books, movies and music," said Michael D. Gallagher, president and CEO of the ESA, which represents the U.S. computer and video game industry. 

"The Court declared forcefully that content-based restrictions on games are unconstitutional; and that parents, not government bureaucrats, have the right to decide what is appropriate for their children." 

"We are thrilled by today's news," added Jennifer Mercurio, VP & General Counsel of the Entertainment Consumers Association. 

"We had hoped that we would see this decision, and it's been a long time coming. That being said, there will probably be one or two legislators who attempt to test these new parameters, and the ECA will continue to fight for the rights of entertainment consumers." 

California State Senator Leland Yee, the author of the law, expressed disappointment in the court's ruling. 

"Unfortunately, the majority of the Supreme Court once again put the interests of corporate America before the interests of our children," Yee said in a statement. "As a result of their decision, Wal-Mart and the video game industry will continue to make billions of dollars at the expense of our kids' mental health and the safety of our community. It is simply wrong that the video game industry can be allowed to put their profit margins over the rights of parents and the well-being of children. 

"While we did not win today, I am certain that this eight year legislative and legal battle has raised the consciousness of this issue for many parents and grandparents, and has forced the video game industry to do a better job at appropriately rating these games," he added. 

"Every major national medical association – including the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics – has concluded that exposure to violent video games causes an increase in aggressive behavior, physiological desensitization to violence, and decrease pro-social behavior," said Yee. "Thus, society has a direct, rational and compelling reason in marginally restricting a minor's access to violent video games."