Gaming Reviews, News, Tips and More.
We may earn a commission from links on this page

U.S. Court of Appeals Rules Schwarzenegger's Game Law Unconstitutional

We may earn a commission from links on this page.

The California law passed in 2005 that would have restricted the sale of violent video games to anyone under the age of 18 has been ruled unconstitutional in a U.S. Court of Appeals.

Since the law went into effect under California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, we're obligated to let you know that the law has essentially been terminated, unless the state decides to appeal the ruling with the U.S. Supreme Court. For now, this law is luggage. It has had a pipe thrown through its torso and has been asked to let off some steam.


In other words...

"This is a win for California's citizens," said Michael Gallagher, head of the Entertainment Software Association. "This is a clear signal that in California and across the country, the reckless pursuit of anti-video game legislation like this is an exercise in wasting taxpayer money, government time, and state resources. In the end, common sense prevailed with the court determining that, after exhaustive review, video games do not cause psychological or neurological harm to minors. And, that the ESRB rating system, educational campaigns and parental controls are the best tools for parents to help control what their children play."


Bo Andersen, head of the Entertainment Merchants Association, whose members will sell future violent video games unimpeded by Arnold and team, was similarly pleased.

"We are extremely gratified by the court's rejection of video game censorship by the state of California. The ruling vindicates what we have said since the bill that became this law was introduced: ratings education, retailer ratings enforcement, and control of game play by parents are the appropriate responses to concerns about video game content," he said.

Andersen added, "I understand that some government officials will push for the state to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review this decision. The state should not acquiesce in this demand, particularly in light of its budget difficulties. The state has already wasted too many tax dollars, at least $283,000 at last count, on this ill-advised, and ultimately doomed, attempt at state-sponsored nannyism."

Oh, snap!