Violent Video Games Statute Unconstitutional
A Minnesota statute that would fine those under 17 who rent or purchase certain video games has been declared unconstitutional by a U.S. District Court.
The Minnesota Restricted Video Games Act was enacted on May 31, 2006. It stated in part that: “[A] person under the age of 17 may not knowingly rent or purchase [a video game rated AO or M by the Entertainment Software Rating Board]. A person who violates this subdivision is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $25.”
The statute was challenged by the Entertainment Software Association and the Entertainment Merchants Association as violating the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The trial court agreed. The court said the statute attempted to regulate video games on the basis of content and thus was presumptively invalid and subject to strict scrutiny review.
The state argued that it had an interest in protecting the psychological well-being of minors and that the act fosters children’s moral and ethical development. In support of its argument, the state relied upon a 2004 meta-analysis study. “The State claims this study supports the proposition that exposure to violent video games is related to aggressive behavior in minors,” the court wrote. “This Court’s review of the article reveals it to be completely insufficient to demonstrate an empirical, causal link between video games and violence in minors. The article, itself, reports that the body of violent video game literature is not sufficiently large to conduct a detailed meta-analysis of a specific feature.”
The court said the state acknowledged “that it is entirely incapable of showing a causal link between the playing of video games and any deleterious effect on the psychological, moral, or ethical well-being of minors.” Moreover, the court said “[i]t is impossible to determine from the data presented whether violent video games cause violence, or whether violent individuals are attracted to violent video games.” Because the Act fails the strict scrutiny test, it is unconstitutional.
The court also found that allowing the Entertainment Software Rating Board to rate the games was an improper delegation of authority since it is a private body that does not provide any method for the public or the State to challenge a rating. “The Court finds such a delegation of authority, whether the penalty for violation of the Act be civil or criminal, violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and renders the Act unconstitutional.”
The Court also enjoined the provision of the Act that required video stores to prominently post a message that renting or purchasing certain video games was unlawful since the act making it unlawful was declared unconstitutional.
Entertainment Software Association et al v. Mike Hatch, Minn. No. 06-CV-2268, July 31, 2006.