From the Louisiana Governor's office on down, Jack Thompson has ripped a number of high-level officials in the ugly reality show surrounding the court fight over the state's video game law. Now the volatile Miami attorney has added a new target.

In a letter sent yesterday to Louisiana Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco and Attorney General Charles Foti, Thompson unleashed a string of criticism upon Federal District Court James Brady, who is hearing the case. Among other comments, Thompson accuses Judge Brady of bias:

"As to Judge Brady, you two (Blanco and Foti), as fellow Democrats, know of his liberal views and his past Chairmanship of the Louisiana Democratic Party. He was nominated by President Clinton because of his liberalism, and with that liberalism goes an absolutist view of the First Amendment that the Founders would not recognize."
( Read more... )

The strange, contentious situation surrounding the legal defense of Louisiana's video game law has gotten even stranger and more contentious.

Yesterday, Miami attorney Jack Thompson (left) forwarded to GamePolitics a pair of e-mails. The first was from Deputy Louisiana Attorney General Burton Guidry to Thompson, sent late Wednesday afternoon:

"Ok Mr. Thompson, put up or shut up. I need affidavits and other documentation to defeat a motion for summary judgment. If you really want to help just get me the affidavits and some scientific data that can defeat this motion as soon as possible. Time is of the essence since [the game industry's motion] has been filed today. I need the information by Monday in my hands for filing. Can you and will you?"

Guidry is referring to the video game industry's motion for summary judgment, filed with Federal Judge James Brady's court earlier that day.
( Read more... )

Are lives really at stake in the legal fight over Louisiana's video game law, or has the situation devolved into a finger-pointing battle of bruised egos?

Over the last 18 months GamePolitics has reported extensively on anti-game attorney Jack Thompson's relentless crusade against video game violence. Nowhere during that time has Thompson enjoyed the kind of political success he found recently in Louisiana. Readers will recall that Thompson drafted the state's video game law, testified on its behalf, and basked in its unanimous approval by the legislature.
( Read more... )

Check out GamePolitics on Joystiq...

In today's column GP examines the circus atmosphere surrounding Louisiana's video game legislation. It's especially timely given Federal District Court Judge James Brady's trashing of the Louisiana law in a preliminary injunction ruling issued last night.

By the way, it looks like the GP column will appear every Friday on Joystiq. There was some discussion of Thursdays, but that's the day GP feeds his WoW addiction...

The federal judge presiding over ESA/EMA vs. Foti, the video game industry's constitutional challenge to Louisiana's new video game law, has indicated he will rule soon on the industry's request for a preliminary injunction.

Federal District Court Judge James Brady held what is known as a "status conference" yesterday in his chambers. Representing the video game industry were local attorney James Brown and lead attorney Paul Smith, who was conferenced in via speakerphone. Smith (left) has enjoyed a string of victories on behalf of the video game industry of late, including big wins in Ilinois, Michigan and Minnesota.
( Read more... )

State Rep. Roy Burrell (D) is standing by his man.

The sponsor of Louisiana's contested video game law refused to be drawn into the nasty fight Jack Thompson picked in recent days with Attorney General Charles Foti (D) and his deputy, Burton Guidry (see yesterday's GP coverage for details).
( Read more... )

Controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson appears to be burning bridges in Louisiana, the state where he has enjoyed the most success to date in his long-standing crusade against violent video games.

A series of e-mails forwarded to GamePolitics by Thompson detail a rapidly deteriorating relationship with the office of Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti. Foti is a named defendant in ESA/EMA vs. Foti, the video game industry's constitutional challenge to the state's recently-passed video game law.
( Read more... )

The fallout continues from Friday's hearing on the video game industry's challenge to the Louisiana game law drafted by Jack Thompson.

As reported by GamePolitics on Friday, Federal District Court Judge James Brady expressed obvious criticism of the Louisiana law from the bench - a bad sign for the video game legislation sponsored by Rep. Roy Burrell (D) and written by Thompson.

Today's Shreveport Times has more, including Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti's vow, expressed by Assistant Burton Gudiry that, "The office of the attorney general is going to defend this all the way to the (U.S) Supreme Court."

Some of Guidry's remarks at Friday's hearing seemed scripted by Jack Thompson, as when Guidry said that video games "teach a kid how to kill, how to rape, how to defile a person, how to kill an officer. Video (game industry) people hide behind the fact that it's a cartoon."
( Read more... )

Is it back to the drawing board for Jack Thompson?

Based on a breaking news report in the Shreveport Times, a Federal judge today seemed quite critical of Louisiana's new law which seeks to declare video game violence as harmful to minors. Thompson, the Miami attorney and anti-game activist, authored the Louisiana bill while assisting its sponsor, Rep. Roy Burrell.

Judge James Brady extended the temporary restraining order he issued on June 16th while he rules on today's request by the video game industry for an injunction.

According to the Times, Assistant Attorney General Burton Guidry and East Baton Rouge Parish District Attorney Doug Moreau argued that Louisiana already bans sales of alcohol, tobacco and pornography as items deemed harmful to minors.

"That's not speech," Judge Brady said from the bench. Although he did allow that the violence in some games is "horrible, but it's protected... Where is violence not protected (in the First Amendment)?"
( Read more... )