The Baltimore Sun, the executive laid out for the mainstream why California's proposed video game law is "based on the discredited myth that the fictional depiction of violence actually causes real violence."
"Never before has the Supreme Court restricted freedom of speech on the basis of violent content," writes Gallagher. "There is no logic in restricting sales of video games, which use avatars, but not books or movies, which often depict violence committed by -- and upon -- real people." This statement follows support from organizations representing other forms of media, which have submitted briefs backing the ESA. (If video games aren't protected, that means other media is at risk.)
"Legal precedent, expert opinion and logic all yield the same conclusion: The California statue is unconstitutional, unwarranted and unnecessary," Gallagher concludes. "Based on the law and the facts -- not the myths -- we hope the U.S. Supreme Court concurs."
Give the editorial a read. A decision in the case, Schwarzenegger v. EMA/ESA, is expected by Spring 2011; the Supreme Court will hear the opening oral arguments next month.