Instruction
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association
View full description, read forum post and attachment, research the topic on your own, then start a new conversation.
In 2011, the United States Supreme Court ruled that California’s ban on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors was unconstitutional. In the 7-2 decision, the Court upheld a lower court ruling and determined that the law passed in 2005 unlawfully restricted the sale of violent video games to people under the age of 18 as it violated their First Amendment right to free speech.
The Supreme Court's decision is attached, but you can also read about it on the Supreme Court's blog at:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/eanf/
Companies that create, publish, distribute, sell and/or rent video games sued the state of California in Federal District Court claiming the law that imposed restrictions and labeling requirements on the sale or rental of "violent video games" to minors was unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The district court agreed and prevented enforcement of the law.
On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court ruling stating that violent video games did not constitute "obscenity" under the First Amendment. The appeals court also affirmed that the state did not have a compelling interest in preventing psychological or neurological harm to minors allegedly caused by video games; and even if the state had a compelling interest, the law was not narrowly tailored enough to meet that objective.
In the Supreme Court proceeding, the justices challenged both sides. Justice Anthony Kennedy voiced concerns that the law infringes on free speech, while Justice Stephen Breyer expressed revulsion about some video games and said it made "common sense" to keep children from engaging in games in which they torture and kill human figures.
The late Justice Antonin Scalia explained in his opinion for the Court that although Mortal Kombat may not be as worthwhile as other speech, it still is entitled to protection under the First Amendment. Even though some people (including some of the Justices) find the video games offensive, the Framers included the First Amendment in the Constitution to protect unpopular speech.
What is your opinion on the issue(s) considered by the Court and the Constitutional interpretation on which you base your opinion?
Be the first to let me know this forum posted and I'll give you a medal.