Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-07-31 16:19:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:first amendment, judge rosenbaum, legislation, mike hatch, minnesota

Minnesota Game Law Tossed By Judge

It seems that gamers weren't the only ones troubled by Minnesota Attorney General Mike Hatch's rather bizarre take on violent video games, which he referred to as "worthless, disgusting speech" and "speech of low societal value."

Federal District Court Judge James Rosenbaum today issued a permanent injunction against Minnesota's "fine the buyer" law. The unusual statute turned traditional video game legislation on end by levying $25 fines against underage buyers of M- and AO-rated games.

As reported by the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune, Judge Rosenbaum ruled that Minnesota failed to prove any harm to kids caused by violent games. The Judge also ruled that the law violated the First Amendment, writing:

"The First Amendment . . . was certainly established to keep the government from becoming the arbiter of what constitutes 'worthless' or 'disgusting' speech. The Court declines the State's invitation to enter into an evaluation of this kind."

Judge Rosenbaum, who played an Xbox as part of his judicial review, was clearly referring to the comments made by Hatch in written arguments in support of the Minnesota law. Thus, Minnesota joins the ranks of states with failed video game laws, including Washington, Illinois, and Michigan. Game statutes in California, Louisiana and Oklahoma are still under judicial review.

EMA (game retailers & renters) President Bo Andersen was quick to react to the Minnesota ruling, saying, "We are pleased that the court has so quickly overturned this ill-conceived law. Even the authors of this law conceded that they never expected it to be enforced..."

Read the entire 16-page decision here. Or, go here for all GamePolitics coverage of the Minnesota law.

Also, a big GP shout-out to reader Shih Tzu for the tip on this one!




Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]joetron2030
2006-07-31 08:42 pm UTC (link)
Minneapolis StarTribune updated article is here (might require registration).

(Reply to this)

(Deleted post)
Re: Just to throw this up...
[info]gamepolitics
2006-07-31 09:11 pm UTC (link)
yeah but only GP has the actual ruling..

;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Just to throw this up... - [info]joetron2030, 2006-07-31 10:08 pm UTC
Re: Just to throw this up... - [info]gamepolitics, 2006-07-31 10:21 pm UTC
I See...
[info]tytazzytiger
2006-07-31 08:56 pm UTC (link)
Interesting...

1. Wewt, even if I don't live up there!
2. More to follow when "More to follow..." becomes, well, more to follow.
3. First Comment WOO!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I See...
[info]jahbulon
2006-07-31 10:57 pm UTC (link)
Please, Please do not exercise your despair at never, ever finishing first in a school track tournament here on this blog. Your comment, had it been first, last or penultimate, would still be worthless. Like this one.

Have a nice day.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]cyn1c42
2006-07-31 08:56 pm UTC (link)
Was anyone surprised?

Now for the Louisiana decision...

(Reply to this)


[info]ianc14
2006-07-31 08:56 pm UTC (link)
No real surprise, but still good news.

(Reply to this)

yay!
[info]l0que
2006-07-31 08:58 pm UTC (link)
Canada (oops I mean minnesota) Wins!

(Reply to this)


[info]xlorep_darkhelm
2006-07-31 08:59 pm UTC (link)
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

(and not that Jack)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]father_time89
2006-08-02 01:06 am UTC (link)
Is that a fight club reference?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]xlorep_darkhelm, 2006-08-02 03:14 am UTC
He passes it to the man . . . .
[info]the1jeffy
2006-07-31 09:02 pm UTC (link)
. . . . . . and BOOM goes the dynamite.

(Reply to this)

Now to actually respond.
[info]tytazzytiger
2006-07-31 09:04 pm UTC (link)
Good on this judge, he knows what the First Amendment protects, and threw out the stupid "fine kids" law. I like that. =)

(Reply to this)


[info]ss_ebonclaw
2006-07-31 09:08 pm UTC (link)
I wonder if you-know-who is aiming to be the first lawyer to get a bill shot down in EVERY state in which he proposes one? Perhaps even the first lawyer to get a bill he authored, in every single state, shot down? At least he'd have the record as being the first(I'm assuming) lawyer to make an ass of themselves in every state of the union, and still claim victory?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]novusuna
2006-07-31 09:28 pm UTC (link)
He won't have to work very hard to get that record. I don't think there are many states left in which he hasn't made an ass of himself.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]shihtzu
2006-07-31 09:27 pm UTC (link)
It's nice to hear that it's still okay to be proud of my home state. I had coworkers actually teasing me about this!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]terminator44
2006-07-31 10:05 pm UTC (link)
Teasing you for being against the bill?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]shihtzu, 2006-07-31 11:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]terminator44, 2006-08-01 03:42 am UTC
Oh America...
[info]premo_maggot
2006-07-31 09:39 pm UTC (link)
How I love your checks and balances. Long life to you :)

cheers!

(Reply to this)

three cheers!
[info]braindead1
2006-07-31 09:41 pm UTC (link)
Another judge who actually deserves his position!

(Reply to this)

Curse those liberal judges!
[info]jabrwock
2006-07-31 10:02 pm UTC (link)
How DARE they keep upholding the constitution! Don't they know that easily swayable parental fear trumps all?

I mean, next thing you know, they'll start awarding "enemy combatants" actual legal rights as prisoners! And then they'll let people sue over surveillance and invasion of privacy without a warrant.

Where do they think they live, some kind of crazy country where rights are supposed to be guaranteed above all else?

Sheesh, tell these silly judges to move to Canada or something. ;)

=====

Aherm. Anyway, I'm glad it worked out. I'l also faily amused that Judge Rosenbaum decided to specifically address Hatch's silly comments about trying to justify restrictions based on whether speech was "worthless" or "disgusting".

By that argument, I could censor most political speeches. :P

(Reply to this)

Let me just say:
[info]terminator44
2006-07-31 10:07 pm UTC (link)
Owwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnneeeddddddd.

(Reply to this)


[info]nerdboyhimself
2006-07-31 10:11 pm UTC (link)
From the footnotes on page 15:

"The court will not speculate as to the motives of those who launched Minnesota's nearly doomed effort to 'protect' our children. Who, after all, opposes protecting children? But, the legislators drafting this law cannot have been blind to its constitutional flaws."

Translation:

"What the **** were you thinking, passing this steaming load?"

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jahbulon
2006-07-31 11:00 pm UTC (link)
Hahahah exactly. Excellent news, a judge who isn't a fool. I knew they were out there, but it's nice to have the theory confirmed.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(no subject) - [info]jabrwock, 2006-07-31 11:08 pm UTC
Hatch vows to appeal, but appeal is unlikely to succeed
[info]jabrwock
2006-07-31 10:16 pm UTC (link)
The US 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that games are speech, so an appeal in Minnesota (which is within the 8th's jurisdiction), would likely get denied rather quickly.

This was over an appeal of a St. Louis county ruling:

-They declared interactive media was speech
-They declared that minors enjoy 1st Amendment rights (except for obscene material, of which violence isn't)
-They declared that parents have the ultimate authority over what products enter their household, and so the government need not step in to assist them (parents are perfectly capable of confiscating games, pulling plugs, etc.)

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/023010p.pdf

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Hatch vows to appeal, but appeal is unlikely to succeed
[info]jesdk
2006-08-01 12:55 am UTC (link)
(parents are perfectly capable of confiscating games, pulling plugs, etc.)
hey, hold right there now.. You mean to say, that.. That..


..That parents are actually CAPABLE?!?

Well color me surprised. I thought parents were mindless tax-paying worker-drones. You know, like countless politicians and a certain lawyer say they are. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Hatch vows to appeal, but appeal is unlikely to succeed - [info]lightwarriorr, 2006-08-01 08:09 am UTC
YAY!
[info]zippydsmlee
2006-07-31 10:45 pm UTC (link)
YAY!

(Reply to this)

Judge questions Anderson's study
[info]jabrwock
2006-07-31 11:14 pm UTC (link)
Footnote from page 7:

Dr. Anderson’s meta-analysis seems to suggest that one can take a number of studies, each of which he admits do not prove the proposition in question, and “stack them up” until a collective proof emerges. It is fair to say that his article does not, on its face, demonstrate the validity of this thesis.

(Reply to this)

OT, but I thought I should bring this up.
[info]terminator44
2006-07-31 11:21 pm UTC (link)
It seems long-time anti-game politico Joe Liberman is all over the news lately.

http://www.connpost.com/elections/

Apprantly, he's become so unpopular in his own party that he is in serious danger of losing next Tuesday's primary to an relativly new challenger. However, we shouldn't celebrate yet, as Liberman now has the support of Bill Clinton (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4069025.html)That's sure to earn him a lot of election points. On the plus side, he has lost support of the well known NY Times (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060731/ap_on_el_se/connecticut_senate_endorsements_3).

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: OT, but I thought I should bring this up.
[info]beardoggx
2006-08-01 02:58 am UTC (link)
1) This is the same Lieberman that criticized Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

2) Most of the people at the rally that Bill attended went for Bill Clinton, not to support Lieberman.

According to dailykos.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: OT, but I thought I should bring this up. - [info]terminator44, 2006-08-01 02:58 pm UTC
Re: OT, but I thought I should bring this up. - [info]beardoggx, 2006-08-02 11:59 am UTC

[info]joshdavis271
2006-07-31 11:52 pm UTC (link)
I love the smell of burning game bills in the morning.

(Reply to this)

Now that this stupid law has been rejected...
[info]phoenixzero
2006-07-31 11:54 pm UTC (link)
It's time for the stupid politicans who drafted and voted for this law to have the same done to them by the voters of Minnesota. That's the only way they'll ever learn, take their jobs from them. There's clearly some incompentence there, especially after reading that interview on Gamespot from a few months ago with that one woman.

(Reply to this)

I saw this coming
[info]ace_of_sevens
2006-07-31 11:56 pm UTC (link)
After the AG issued that press release, my reaction was that the translation was: I know this law is going to get thrown out, but I'm really mad about it. Thsi was a ridiculous law with no chance of making it through the courts and was passed to make a statement. Which they did, I guess. I wonder if it turned out how they hoped.

(Reply to this)

Justice!
[info]zmanzach007
2006-08-01 12:15 am UTC (link)
Ah, each time one of these bullcrap laws get shot down, it makes me feel like there is still a little justice in the world.

Sorry Hatch, looks like you're gonna have to go dig up some more false shit to use against the industry, only to get your ass kicked again.

(Reply to this)

This is sad lol
[info]lightwarriorr
2006-08-01 12:17 am UTC (link)
Politians been shot down so much that no one is "suprised" anymore.

(Reply to this)


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…