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

Illustration for article titled U.S. Court of Appeals Rules Schwarzenegger's Game Law Unconstitutional

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!



I guess I'll be the 'moron' and say I think they had it right. Personally, I think selling violent or otherwise immoral games to minors SHOULD be illegal. I'm well over 18 and I have a nephew that, despite my input, grew up playing violent and really M rated games (my brother is an idiot when it comes to that stuff- as I said, despite my input) and my nephew- brainy as he was when he was a kid, is a fuck-up now. He literally grew up playing GTA and COD games. He sat through the more horrific scenes as if it were a baby sitter. Then he went on to and started living the life of Saint's Row. His words, not mine. He dresses like a wigger, acts like a wigger and is very casual about drugs. He talks about Saint's Row like it's his life. And whenever those school shootings happened (all of them) he doesn't blink an eye. He asks what guns were used and I even saw him laugh about shit like that. And he was an 'A' student all the way up until 7th grade- then he started the games and living through them... and now he's someone I find unbearable (he's 17 now). I really do believe that him growing up playing shit that was WAY beyond his years had an effect on his mental outlook. So... yea. I think that it's completely constitutional for the Government to say 'this M rated game isn't for kids. If adults are clueless about what M means- we'll enforce it for them. That way- if you want your 12 year old kid playing video games like Saint's Row... YOU buy it for him.'

That's it.