| | |
Court Refuses to Revive Video Game Restrictions
The Supreme Court refused to revive an Indianapolis law requiring parental consent before children may play violent arcade games, which a lower court struck down as an unconstitutional damper on free speech.
The court did not comment today in rejecting an appeal over the law requiring that parents accompany children who want to play certain video games. Parents must also give formal consent before children may use the machines.
The law, which backers said is apparently the first of its kind, bars people under 18 from such games unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Under the measure, the city could have fined arcade owners $200 per day for each violation.
Indianapolis also requires coin-operated games featuring graphic violence or strong sexual content to have warning labels and be kept at least 10 feet from any nonviolent game machines. The games must also be separated by a curtain or wall so unaccompanied children cannot see them.
The mayor and other city leaders asked the Supreme Court to decide if the video games are protected by free-speech guarantees, and whether such speech should be judged by a different standard in the interests of protecting children.
The city also asked the court to examine whether those under 18 have a First Amendment right to play the video games without a parent's consent.
"The ordinance is not a ban on speech, but merely a narrow, carefully crafted regulation of when and in what manner a child may play a few video games," the city wrote in asking the court to hear its appeal.
Arcade operators said the law limits the free-speech rights of parents, other adults, businesses that offer the games, game creators and others.
The city failed to justify the law on grounds that it protects children, because there is no established link between violent video games and any physical, psychological or emotional harm to children, opponents of the law argued.
The measure has been nearly unenforceable since it was passed in 2000. A federal court allowed the law to take effect pending a further review of its constitutionality, but the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision and called the measure a violation of the First Amendment.
Writing for the 7th Circuit court, Judge Richard Posner chided the city for going after only games, noting that other media can depict violence.
"Violent video games played in public places are a tiny fraction of the media violence to which modern American children are exposed," he wrote. "Tiny -- and judging from the record of this case not very violent compared to what is available to children on television and in movie theaters today."
SOURCE: Associated Press.
442
|
|
|
|
