Proponents of local and state laws that ban the sale of “violent” video games to minors should just give up. One court after the next has overturned these laws as violations of the First Amendment’s guarantees of free speech.
In case after case (Minnesota, Illinois, California, Michigan), federal judges have been unequivocal in their views that these fuzzy laws can’t be justified. The latest example: U.S. District Court Judge James Brady struck down a Louisiana state law that barred the sale of violent video games to minors.
In his opinion, Judge Brady said that the law was an “invasion of First Amendment rights” of everybody — game makers, game retailers and game players. Brady said in no uncertain terms that violent speech is protected speech. “Depictions of violence are entitled to full constitutional protection,” he wrote in his opinion.
He dismissed the argument that violent video games are psychologically harmful to minors and said that even if it’s true that these games stir fear or violent attitudes in young people (a much disputed contention among social scientists), free speech rights still triumph.
“The state may not restrict video game expression merely because it dislikes the way that expression shapes an individual’s thoughts and attitudes,” he wrote.
Cynthia Brumfield at 10:42 AM|Comments(0)
Blogs We Read
