This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Business & Tech

Supreme Court Rules Violent Games "Free Speech"

Constitution prevents limiting distribution of games to minors, Court rules, but impact on local sales unclear

The U.S. Supreme Court by a 7-2 vote today struck down a California law that banned the sale or rental of violent video games to children under the age of 18.

The court majority said the games are protected by the First Amendment right of free speech. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, "Like protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas -- and even social messages.

"That suffices to confer First Amendment protection," Scalia wrote.

Interested in local real estate?Subscribe to Patch's new newsletter to be the first to know about open houses, new listings and more.

An unlikely duo, conservative-leaning Clarence Thomas and liberal-leaning Stephen Breyer, agreed that the California video game ban should have been upheld, but for different reasons.

Locally, the store at Soscol Ave follows the corporate policy, according to manager Anthony Sedano, of not selling any video game rated M (mature) to any individual younger than 17, unless a parent or other guardian is present at the sale. People 17 or older must have a valid California ID (not a school ID) to be able to purchased new or used games.

Interested in local real estate?Subscribe to Patch's new newsletter to be the first to know about open houses, new listings and more.

At , rental accounts set limits on who can rent games, as well as rental policies for M games or R-rated movies. Renters under 17 are therefore allowed to rent games if the account record shows parental approval, but IDs are checked before purchase.

Among the popular games that teens were often frustrated from buying were “Call of Duty,” “Grand Theft Auto” and “Resident Evil” among others.

It’s unlikely the Supreme Court decision would change GameStop’s corporate policy, although phone calls to their Texas offices went unanswered at midday. 

Violent video have come under the microscope of state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco/San Mateo, who wrote a law in 2005 that would make ban the sale and rental of games that depict ultra-violent injury to humans to people younger than 18 years old. But court cases prevented the law from ever taking effect.

The Video Software Dealers Association, now part of the Entertainment Merchants Association, filed a federal lawsuit to block the law after its passage, and Judge Ronald Whyte of the U.S. District Court for Northern California struck it down in August 2007. The state appealed, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling in 2009.

The Parents Television Council issued a statement denouncing the court decision. “When an industry trade group files a federal lawsuit to defend a child’s constitutional rights, the alarm bells should be deafening" said PTC President Tim Winter. "It is hard to imagine a more cynical proposition. Sadly, today’s ruling proves the United States Supreme Court heard the video game industry loud and clear, but turned a deaf ear to concerned parents.

"The Court has provided children with a Constitutionally-protected end-run on parental authority,” Winter was quoted.

The law has been viewed as a test case for First Amendment protections for the video game industry, with manufacturers arguing they should be allowed the same protections as producers of books, films and other forms of media.

Bay City News contributed to this report.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?