Next Tuesday, the Supreme Court is set to review California’s 2005 law banning the sale of violent video games to minors. The law never went into effect in California because the video game industry immediately sued, claiming the law violated the First Amendment (their claim was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court). However, California officials behind the law are arguing that the rationale expressed in Ginsburg v. New York, which made it illegal to sell risqué magazines to minors because content that is not obscene may still be harmful to children and therefore may be regulated, can be extended to include violent content not just content that contains nudity. Publishers and filmmakers are backing the video game industry on this one, fearing that California lawmakers’ efforts to “protect children” will lead to a creative freeze across different media and to new regulations.

For the full article, click here

For more on how the courts usually respond to First Ammendment Cases, check out this course by George Freeman : Prior Restraints: Why Courts Disfavor Limitations on Speech