California passed a law that prohibited the sale or rental of “violent video games.” The act defined violent video games as games “in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being, if those acts are depicted” in a manner that “[a] reasonable person, considering the game as a whole, would find appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors.” The association of video game manufacturers and developers brought suit, challenging the California statute as an unconstitutional violation of their First Amendment right and a violation of their due process rights because it is so vague. What should the U.S. Supreme Court hold on the constitutionality of the statute and why? [Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n, 131 S.Ct. 2729]
Answer to relevant QuestionsPenny Stafford, the owner of Belvi Coffee and Tea Exchange, located in Bellevue, Washington, brought an antitrust suit against Starbucks. She alleged that through its exclusive leases, Starbucks bans other coffee shops from ...Sara Bostwick hired Christian Oth, Inc., to be her wedding photographer. The parties’ written contract granted ownership of the copyright in all images created to Oth. Oth posted the wedding photos on its Web site. ...In 1972, Donald and Joyce Carnahan purchased a 1-acre lot located on a 22-acre lake. The purchase included a portion of the lake bed. The Carnahans used the lake for recreational activity in both winter and summer, and their ...Bradt believed his backyard ran all the way to a fence. Actually, a strip on Bradt’s side of the fence belonged to his neighbor Giovannone, but Bradt never intended to take land away from anyone. Bradt later brought an ...Bermuda Run Country Club, Inc., developed a tract of land, formed a country club, and sold some of the lots to individual buyers. Following various sales and litigation, an agreement was executed giving the board of ...
Post your question