.
Feedback

High Court Overturns Violent Video Games Law

State Sen. Leland Yee's law would have fined stores $1,000 for selling violent video games to minors.

The U.S. Supreme Court by a 7-2 vote today struck down a California law that banned the sale or rental of violent video games to children under the age of 18.

The court majority said the games are protected by the First Amendment right of free speech.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, "Like protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas—and even social messages.

"That suffices to confer First Amendment protection," Scalia wrote.

The court ruled in a lawsuit filed in federal court in San Jose in 2005 by two industry groups, the Entertainment Merchants Association and the Entertainment Software Association.

The 2005 law, written by state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Mateo/San Francisco, would have fined stores $1,000 for selling violent video games to minors. It was blocked from going into effect by an injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Ronald Whyte of San Jose.

Yee said today, "Unfortunately, the majority of the Supreme Court once again put the interests of corporate America before the interests of our children."

Yee said he "absolutely" will consider proposing a narrower law that might pass muster with the high court.

"We're poring through the opinions to see where we can create a pathway for a successful bill that could withstand a challenge," Yee said.

But Michael Gallagher, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Entertainment Software Association, said, "This is a historic and complete win for the First Amendment and the creative freedom of artists and storytellers everywhere."

Gallagher said, "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."

Scalia said in the majority opinion that the California law didn't fit into limited restrictions on free speech historically allowed by the courts to restrict obscenity and incitement to violence.

He wrote that the California law would have created "a wholly new category of content-based regulation."

"That is unprecedented and mistaken," Scalia wrote.

The court upheld similar rulings in which the ban was found unconstitutional by Whyte in 2007 and by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in 2009.

Two high court justices—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito—agreed in a concurring opinion that the law should be struck down, but said a narrower law might be found constitutional. Two other justices, Stephen Breyer and Clarence Thomas, dissented from the majority.

Yee said he will be studying the concurring and dissenting opinions to try to develop a revised bill.

"The evidence is absolutely crystal clear that there are harmful effects on our children," Yee asserted.

-Bay City News

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Mateo Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bren May 19, 2013 at 06:49 pm
I see that I meant to type "...that connect us to the past," but I accidentally typedRead More "...and connect us to the past." I think my meaning came through, though. Yes, the world does not need another national chain retail store or restaurant, which is surely what they're planning to put in there.
CP May 19, 2013 at 02:22 pm
Yes Bren, agree with you....good point.....really what it seems to come down to is money vs. theRead More good of the community and richness of traditions. And all despite the Master Plan for that site in San Mateo that seems to require an ice skating rink or similar recreational facility AT THAT SITE, and all despite the fact the Ice Chalet would like to continue operations there. The Developer has made it difficult to impossible for any ice rink to operate there (tricky it seems)....so they can get a cookie cutter retail outlet in ? .....very, very sad for the youth of the community.
Bren May 17, 2013 at 10:09 am
I think the issue is much larger than whether children will experience stress. That ice rink is aRead More local institution, dating back at least to when Fashion Island was there. It's terrible for communities to lose so many landmarks and connect us to the past.
Anita Reimann April 29, 2013 at 11:43 am
Dear Ari, Thank you for your service to our community. It's wonderful that you are already making aRead More difference.