gamepolitics: ESA Seeks $644,000 in Attorney's Fees From State of Illinois

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-03-16 09:26:00

Entry tags:

blagojevich, court cases, esa, illinois, legal fees, legislation

ESA Seeks $644,000 in Attorney's Fees From State of Illinois

Wow. GP is in the wrong business. Shoulda been a lawyer...

The ESA has just announced that it will seek to recover $644,545 in legal fees expended in its successful effort to block Illinois' video game law on First Amendment grounds.

"From the day Governor Blagojevich announced that he would seek anti-video game legislation, it was clear to everyone that the proposal would be found unconstitutional and would waste taxpayers dollars in a protracted legal fight that would leave parents no better off," said ESA boss Doug Lowenstein.

"... we would have preferred to spend our resources on cooperative programs to help parents ensure their kids play appropriate games, rather than divert money to respond to politically motivated attacks on video games. But the State has left little choice, and this petition is consistent with the rules of the federal courts regarding award of attorney's fees to prevailing parties."

In a story reported by GamePolitics last December, Federal District Court Judge Matthew Kennelly struck down the Safe Games Illinois Act is rather harsh language, writing in part, "If controlling access to allegedly 'dangerous' speech is important in promoting the positive psychological development of children, in our society that role is properly accorded to parents and families, not the State."

Lowenstein added, "We had hoped to reach a settlement without the need to file this petition because we believe it is important to move on, both so Illinois taxpayers know the full cost of this litigation... unfortunately, while it was clear we could agree on the amount of fees to be reimbursed, the state made other demands which we could not accept. Accordingly, consistent with our belief that the public has a right to know how much of their tax dollars were spent defending a statute that everyone knew from the start was unconstitutional, we have proceeded with this filing."

(Post a new comment)

	Constitution.. SMASH! anticron 2006-03-16 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	I wonder if the same.. rather public.. disclosure will happen in all of the other unconstitutional proposals. Nothing says, "WTF?" better than alerting the public to horribly misspent tax dollars. (Reply to this)

	ashsaber 2006-03-16 02:49 pm UTC (link)
	And the Sleeping Tiger finally wakes. This should be good... (Reply to this)

	What should happen... bigman_k 2006-03-16 03:07 pm UTC (link)
	It's too bad this money can't come right out of Blagobitch's own pocket book, rather then the Illinois taxpayers. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: What should happen... anticron 2006-03-16 03:09 pm UTC (link)
	Tell me about it. Illinois is already having enough trouble as it is, without having to foot the bill for Blago's tripe as well. Luckily, he's almost certainly not being re-elected this fall. Nobody likes him. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: What should happen... jesdk 2006-03-16 04:07 pm UTC (link)
	And he's going to be even LESS popular if this goes through! lol (Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: What should happen... keddren 2006-03-16 07:44 pm UTC (link)
	He's still trying to find pizza money. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	ESA FTW i_iv_v 2006-03-16 03:09 pm UTC (link)
	Damn good idea and really proves the point. I wander if these will happen in other states? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: ESA FTW tollwutig 2006-03-16 03:22 pm UTC (link)
	Very likely as it is common practice, if a group has to file a suit to defend the constitution against government, they end up suing for the legal fees, as the Government should have known better than to pass something unconstitutional. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	This should give the anti-video game politicans a message... jerico6 2006-03-16 03:12 pm UTC (link)
	not to fuck with the constitution. (Reply to this)

Good luck, ESA

o_rangekrush
2006-03-16 04:19 pm UTC (link)

If ESA gets is legal fees - I will fly down to florida and personally give Jack Thompson a big hug (if I can find him)

Sorry to say this but I would not go along with this initiative by ESA. My thoughts are on the bigger picture in that private business should not have the ability to hand tie a government by seeking an enormous amount of compensation when bills fail.

Sure, in this particular case, it would be just desserts. But consider the broader aspects. What if a State were to try to impose greater safety devices in cars or tougher emissions controls and those bills eventually failed? Do you think it would be 'right' for GM and Ford to seek compensation for their legal/lobby bills?

I understand the argument that this case was an attempt at circumventing the First Amendment. But in my experience, once you open the door an inch, everyone will try to kick it right off the hinges.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Good luck, ESA

thaylin
2006-03-16 04:41 pm UTC (link)

Yes I do. If a state attacks all automakers with something that they KNOW is unconstitutional then they should have to pay when it is found unconstitutional. Otherwise we have the complete oposite effect, which in my believe is even more hanus, where the state hand ties the public from being able to defend themselves from unconstitutional bills because the public will have to pay twice. Once for the goverment to create the bad bill, then a second time to have it stuck down in court. If it was something that targetted something primarily poor folks used how would they pay to have it struck down.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Good luck, ESA

thefremen
2006-03-16 06:01 pm UTC (link)

The ESA had to spend a shitload of money to protect your rights as an American citizen, they have every right to recover the money. Same goes for defendants who are sued by their grandmother for eating too many of her pop-tarts, and if GM faught an unconstitutional law in court, they could as well.

Thing is, they'll never do that to automakers, but if they think they can get away with it to become a "family values" candidate, they'll keep passing these laws they know are unconstitutional.

Just keep remembering Bush's famous quote after the leak about his unwarranted spying: "Yeah, I approved listening in on American's phone calls without a warrant even though it's hella easy to get one. What you gonna do about it, BITCH?"

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Good luck, ESA the_doctor 2006-03-16 06:31 pm UTC (link)
	Actually, from what I read of ESA's statement, they were going to get the money anyway, but the state wanted to attach conditions (I'm guessing they didn't want the amount made public). So now they'll probably still get the money, just in a very public fashion. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Good luck, ESA

bigman_k
2006-03-16 10:42 pm UTC (link)

If the defendants can't be compensated for their fees in challanging an unconstitutional and unjust law then lawmakers would just keep passing and passing these laws to the point where the ESA goes broke and can't fight back. It would also have no negative effect on those who passed the bills because even though they lost in the court chanllange there would be no punishment for them from passing these unconstitutional laws and they could just keep trying again and again and again forever.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	There is one appropriate comment for this: startropics 2006-03-16 04:21 pm UTC (link)
	(Reply to this)

	I hope they are sucessful duncan_922 2006-03-16 04:23 pm UTC (link)
	Even though I don't think they will be sucessful, I certainly hope so. This would certainly halt this constant diarrhea of mee-too legislations and videogame violence bills that are draining the tax payers money just so the idiots proposing them can get a little spotlight. (Reply to this)

silver_derstin
2006-03-16 04:38 pm UTC (link)

I certainly hope they get their money back, especially if it hurts the taxpayers even more. Nothing says: "We won because you ALL were idiots" then getting money from all the people of a nation. Germany experienced it in World War 1, and boy were they happy after that...

If anyone should pay for this, it's the political parties that supported those bills and their own lawyer firms. The taxpayer will become enraged at the ESA if they start taking their funds out of their pocket.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Actually

jabrwock
2006-03-16 05:28 pm UTC (link)

I think the plan is less to get their money back, and more to publicly humilliate the Governor. Tell the public how much money he wasted fighting for a relatively (compared to things like crime) unimportant issue, and it won't matter if they actually got the money or not. The trick is to keep reminding people how much money the governor spent on something like this, and then compare it to, say, spending on salaries for police officers, and people will realise just how much money the governor wasted in order to try to buy their votes.

When it comes down to the crunch, taxpayers HATE being reminded about how much of their hard-earned money was wasted. Look at the last election up here. The Conservatives kept reminding people in Quebec how much money the Liberals spent on do-nothing legislation, basically attempts to buy their vote, and it right royally pissed off Quebecers, who felt insulted. The rest of Canada also got mad, because of all that money that was spent for nothing.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Actually

silver_derstin
2006-03-16 05:40 pm UTC (link)

True enough, but people get even more mad when their tax money go into the pockets of organisations they do not approve of (like the ESA at this time of political upheaval against Video Games).

It's a vicious circle at this point... If the ESA doesn't want their money back and just want to point out how much was spent, it's going to bring an end to video game legislation. If they want their money back (and I'm sure they do) and fight for it, people will see their earnings fall in the hands of the ESA, not something they want.

Whatever the case is, Blagojevitch is going to be held responsible ANYWAYS. That's a nice compensation.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Actually

anticron
2006-03-16 06:37 pm UTC (link)

It's definately a vicious circle, but it helps to expose hopelessly incompetent seats in the local governments.

On one hand, they (the officials) didn't like or believe in the bill; on the other hand, they voted it in because if they didn't there would be stronger repurcussions for their potential re-election. They knew it was going to fail. They voted it on because they deemed it the right thing to do for themselves rather than their constituents.

The public isn't going to understand that until they see the big green dollar signs floating around the media. They'll happily assume that their reps are doing things for the people rather than for the reps' own careers. This was a $645k publicity stunt.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Actually

nozomu
2006-03-16 07:00 pm UTC (link)

I'd like to think people would be smart enough to know that the ESA isn't taking their money, the governor and state legislature are. These people make the laws, and they should have known when they lost, they would be legally obligated to pay the other side's legal fees.

Seriously, would you forefit over half a million dollars you were entitled to? Just because it's the state and not a private party doesn't change the rules. The fact is the people elected this government to speak for them, so the people are the ones who brought this bill forward, and the people should now have to pay for their mistake.

I personally don't want my tax dollars going to "faith-based initiatives" for social programs. But I blame the elected officials who decided to give tax dollars to churches, not the churches themselves. Because those churches could choose not to take government money in a program that's unpopular with about half of the nation. But they're not stupid, and neither is the ESA... they're going to collect the money they're due, just like anyone else would.

I don't think that taxpayers are all moronic children who are going to see this as the ESA taking their money in a fit of Enron-esque greed. They're going to see it for what it is, the government pissing it away in a fit of Reagan-esque waste.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	Re: Actually lordlundar 2006-03-17 12:49 am UTC (link)
	hence the public announcement. By declaring a compensation for defending people's rights from a goverment body willing to remove the rights, they endear themselves to the public. The goverment used taxpayer money to try to pass the bill, and now it's using it to appease the ESA. If the ESA took the money silently, then there'd be a problem. (Reply to this) (Parent)

rhanlav
2006-03-16 05:32 pm UTC (link)

Hah! If the State is gunna do stupid stuff, then you know what, its completely legal for those injured by it to seak damages and legal fees. Oh this is so cool it hurts. I hope they win this too. Hopefully this will keep stupid, frivolous laws from being passed without due consideration. At the very least, you might not get Govenors saying "Well, we won't know if its unconstitutional till we make it a law". Yes you can tell, and I hope when they get taken to court for damage, it'll make the public realize what morons they've elected.

(Reply to this)

	I'm curious jabrwock 2006-03-16 05:36 pm UTC (link)
	It sounds like the state was willing to pay the ESA's legal fees, but demanded something in return. I'm curious what those extra conditions were that the state insisted on? (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: I'm curious silver_derstin 2006-03-16 05:42 pm UTC (link)
	I am pretty sure I know, due to the threat of the ESA... The condition was most likely NOT to disclose how much was spent on this bill. That's about the only concession they could try to get from the ESA, but Lowenstein appears to be a tad bit better at politics at this time. (Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Don't think it's about being bitter...

duncan_922
2006-03-16 06:42 pm UTC (link)

At least not entirely. But the fact of the matter is that every idiot senator that craps up a bill like this is actually MAKING money from their salaries, while the ESA LOOSES money trying to stop it. It's pretty obvious that most of these laws are just pathetic attempts for the senators and mayors to grab a little spotlight. If a precedent is set that if they loose, they'll have to pay for court expenses, maybe they'll think twice.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	markusdragon 2006-03-16 06:07 pm UTC (link)
	Hmm... half a million per state, 50 states, that's potentially 25 million dollars of wasted tax money if this ban-happy culture continues. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	silver_derstin 2006-03-16 06:11 pm UTC (link)
	They could send all that money to the Aware Online Gamer Association (namely US) really. Would do a lot more good in our hands... maybe. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	jabrwock 2006-03-16 07:48 pm UTC (link)
	Hmm... half a million per state And that's only the ESA's lawyers' costs. That doesn't include the cost of the government lawyers, experts compensated for their testimony, court fees and costs of tying up the facilities and staff during the whole affair. Not to mention all the money wasted writing and advertising the bill in the first place... (Reply to this) (Parent)

	It would be better... the1jeffy 2006-03-16 06:44 pm UTC (link)
	if the ESA got the money, then immediately donated the exact amount to help tornado victims. I believe Illinois was fairly well rocked by storms recently. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: It would be better... blitzfitness 2006-03-16 06:47 pm UTC (link)
	We were, as was much of the midwest (i'm south side Chicago). I had the idea that this would be perfect if they returned the money to the tax payers, but your's is much better. Sadly, I doubt anything like that will actually happen, but I can't fault the ESA for that. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: It would be better...

nozomu
2006-03-16 07:06 pm UTC (link)

If the ESA gets the money, it's going to go to their lawyers. The government wasted their time and resources, and the government is responcible to pay for it.

Personally, I hope the ESA takes the money and continues to fight for our first amendment rights. It may be a thankless job, and you may even get scorn heaped on you (look at the ACLU), but if we didn't have groups like the ESA to fight this bill, then it would have been enacted and enforced.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

	Re: It would be better... brainswarm 2006-03-17 04:34 am UTC (link)
	The money already went to their lawyers. They would just be getting the money they spent reimbursed. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	hmm.. akiko_kawatachi 2006-03-16 09:00 pm UTC (link)
	"we would have preferred to spend our resources on cooperative programs to help parents ensure their kids play appropriate games" It would look really great for all of us if the ESA holds to that statement... And think of how much dumber Blagojevich will look if the ESA not only gets the money, but uses said dollars to start a program that really works? (Reply to this)

bitnine
2006-03-17 03:29 pm UTC (link)

Yeah, this pretty much has to happen. The state can't be allowed to drain the finacial resources of target industries or companies through junk legislation. Particularly if the relevent bills appear to be not be passed through good faith.

Let's say that lawmakers started passing bills that outlawed board games. Well, Parker Brothers certainly can fight and will definately have any such law struck down. But let's say that a particular block of lawmakers pass 2-3 different versions of this bill in dozens of states every year. The board game makers of America would have to spend a giant amount of effort and money to fight and overturn these bills. Eventually it would have a signifigant impact on the viability of board game companies.

There simply needs to be a recourse mechanism for such actions. If there were not, legislation could be used as a chilling effect in a manner that circumvented our legal protections.

(Reply to this)

	Well, if anyone cares... jquilty 2006-03-18 05:30 pm UTC (link)
	This story appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times today. In the buisness section that I'm probably one of the few that reads it, but in the paper nontheless. (Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…

About

Help

Get Involved

Legal

Store

LJ Labs