Federal Judge Blocks California Violent Vidgame Law

That's unconstitutional dammit, and I can prove it!

Just when it appeared that the California Violent Video Game Act was going to become law on New Year's Day someone had to ruin the fun. At first everything looked legal eagle until Judge Ronald Whyte remembered something yesterday: the Constitution. Apparently, if you read to the end there's some amendments. Wouldn't you know it, the very first one has gotten in the way.

From GamePolitics.com:

An informed source told GP Judge Whyte held that games are protected by First Amendment, children have First Amendment rights, and the concept of "strict scrutiny" applies. The source also told GP that the judge believes the video game industry is likely to prevail on its claim that the law violates the First Amendment. The state's requirement of labeling violent games is also held likely to be unconstitutional.

Interestingly, deviating from previous rulings, Judge Whyte found that California's law is not impermissibly vague. The judge indicated that Postal II is covered while Full Spectrum Warrior is not.

The VSDA, whom has been fighting the bill, got a little jab in there too.

Bo Andersen, President of the Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA), reacting to the preliminary injunction, said, "VSDA frankly takes no pleasure in this decision. The injunction was inevitable, as is a final ruling that the law is unconstitutional. It is indeed unfortunate that the state of California has wasted precious taxpayer dollars in pursuing this legislation, when the outcome is so predictable: This law will never go into effect... It is time for legislators to move beyond the rhetoric uttered in support of passage of such censorial legislation."

California legislature, you just got served.