Diary Note: Supreme Court to Rule on Violent Video Games
Ruling before SCOTUS goes on holiday.
Clarence Thomas - Judgemental
A quick note for your gaming diary: The Supreme Court of the United States (SCotUS) us going on a break in a fortnight, so it's going to hand down rulings on such cases as Brown vs The Entrainment Association fo America about selling ultra-violent games to minors.
The details of the case (docket number No. 08-1448) are that:
"California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors under 18 where a reasonable person would find that the violent content appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors, is patently offensive to prevailing community standards as to what is suitable for minors, and causes the game as a whole to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.
"The respondent industry groups challenged this prohibition on its face as violating the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's judgment permanently enjoining enforcement of the prohibition. "
The Judges are considering:
"1. Does the First Amendment bar a state from restricting the sale of violent video games to minors? 2. If the First Amendment applies to violent video games that are sold to minors, and the standard of review is strict scrutiny, under Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. F.C.C., 512 U.S. 622, 666 (1994), is the state required to demonstrate a direct causal link between violent video games and physical and psychological harm to minors before the state can prohibit the sale of the games to minors?"
So, keep your eyes peeled before June 30th.
The details of the case (docket number No. 08-1448) are that:
"California Civil Code sections 1746-1746.5 prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors under 18 where a reasonable person would find that the violent content appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors, is patently offensive to prevailing community standards as to what is suitable for minors, and causes the game as a whole to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.
"The respondent industry groups challenged this prohibition on its face as violating the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's judgment permanently enjoining enforcement of the prohibition. "
The Judges are considering:
"1. Does the First Amendment bar a state from restricting the sale of violent video games to minors? 2. If the First Amendment applies to violent video games that are sold to minors, and the standard of review is strict scrutiny, under Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. F.C.C., 512 U.S. 622, 666 (1994), is the state required to demonstrate a direct causal link between violent video games and physical and psychological harm to minors before the state can prohibit the sale of the games to minors?"
So, keep your eyes peeled before June 30th.
Comments
gingineer 20 Jun 2011 12:47
1/2
Personally i think violent and sexually explicit games should not be played by minors... I'm surprised it is still an issue in the states.
Yawgie 20 Jun 2011 17:08
2/2
Your post is very ignorant. We don't want minors to be playing games for adults. That is why the ESRB exists. The MPAA exists for the same reason, though for a different media. The government has no role in the MPAA, and it should have no role in the ESRB. That is what this case is about, not "We think four year olds should be shooting wave after wave of prostitutes."