The US Supreme Court heard argument on Tuesday on the California law which banned the sale of violent video games to minors in some circumstances.
According to this article in the Wall Street Journal, the Justices were seemingly split on the issue. If you look at the makeup of the court, this case is shaping up to be one of the cases where the Justices align in a way that makes you say "huh"? I will be curious to see the majority opinion (if there is one).
My opinion:
I do not think the Justices will have a difficult time concluding video games are speech and entitled to First Amendment protection. Most games in the "shooter" genre (e.g. Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Call of Duty) have intricate story lines and are just as important to the content as the game play itself. The games tell a story just like a book. Given that, it will be difficult for the State to justify the necessity of the law, especially when there are already alternatives in place to warn of the content of games, such as the rating system found on the outside of each cartridge.
I do not dare to predict how this case turns out, but I will predict that the wonderfully overused, but descriptive phrase, "slippery slope" will find its way into all opinions on this case.
Update: The Court ruled on 6/27/11 the Act was unconstitutional.
Update: The Court ruled on 6/27/11 the Act was unconstitutional.
