Brown vs. Entertainment Merchants Assn
EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Petitioners v. ENTERTAINMENT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION et al.
No. 08-1448
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
131 S. Ct. 2729; 180 L. Ed. 2d 708; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4802; 79 U.S.L.W. 4658; 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 1259
November 2, 2010, Argued
June 27, 2011, Decided
JUDGES: Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., joined. Thomas, J., and Breyer, J., filed dissenting opinions.
OPINION BY: SCALIA
OPINION
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
We consider whether a California law imposing restrictions on violent video games comports with the First Amendment.
I
California Assembly Bill 1179 (2005), Cal. Civ. Code Ann. ßß 1746-1746.5 (West 2009) (Act), prohibits the sale or rental of "violent video games" to minors, and requires their packaging to be labeled "18." The Act covers games "in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being, if those acts are depicted" in a manner that "[a] reasonable person, considering the game as a whole, would find appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors," that is "patently offensive to prevailing standards in the community as to what is suitable for minors," and that "causes the game, as a whole, to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors." ß 1746(d)(1)(A). Violation of the Act is punishable by a civil fine of up to $1,000. ß 1746.3.
Respondents, representing the video-game and software industries, brought a preenforcement challenge to the Act in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. That court concluded that the Act violated the First Amendment and permanently enjoined its enforcement. Video Software Dealers Assn. v. Schwarzenegger, No. C-05-04188,
No. 08-1448
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
131 S. Ct. 2729; 180 L. Ed. 2d 708; 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4802; 79 U.S.L.W. 4658; 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 1259
November 2, 2010, Argued
June 27, 2011, Decided
JUDGES: Scalia, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Roberts, C. J., joined. Thomas, J., and Breyer, J., filed dissenting opinions.
OPINION BY: SCALIA
OPINION
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
We consider whether a California law imposing restrictions on violent video games comports with the First Amendment.
I
California Assembly Bill 1179 (2005), Cal. Civ. Code Ann. ßß 1746-1746.5 (West 2009) (Act), prohibits the sale or rental of "violent video games" to minors, and requires their packaging to be labeled "18." The Act covers games "in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being, if those acts are depicted" in a manner that "[a] reasonable person, considering the game as a whole, would find appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors," that is "patently offensive to prevailing standards in the community as to what is suitable for minors," and that "causes the game, as a whole, to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors." ß 1746(d)(1)(A). Violation of the Act is punishable by a civil fine of up to $1,000. ß 1746.3.
Respondents, representing the video-game and software industries, brought a preenforcement challenge to the Act in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. That court concluded that the Act violated the First Amendment and permanently enjoined its enforcement. Video Software Dealers Assn. v. Schwarzenegger, No. C-05-04188,