The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a U.S. District Court ruling which declared a California law banning video game sales to minors was unconstitutional and violated First Amendment guarantees of free speech. In its decision, the court applied the strict scrutiny standard of review. The strict scrutiny standard of review requires that the purpose, objective, or interest being pursued by the government must be “compelling”. Also, the means to achieve the purpose, objective, or interest is reviewed to determine if it is “narrowly tailored” to the accomplishment of the governmental purpose, objective, or interest. There must not be any less restrictive means that would accomplish the governments objective just as well. The court found the state was unable to prove there were no less restrictive means to acheive its objective. The state also failed to prove that it had a compelling need to protect against psychological or neurological harm caused to minors playing violent video games.
The 2005 California statute prohibited the sale or rental of violent video games to minors under the age of 17, and required retailers to label violent games. Courts in other states, including Michigan, Illinois, Louisiana, and Minnesota, have also declared similar laws to be unconstitutional.
Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2009/02/ninth-circuit-rules-ban-on-video-game.php
