EMA President Issues Statement on SCOTUS Fight

November 2, 2010

The Entertainment Merchants Association president issued a brief statement on today’s oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court related to Schwarzenegger v. EMA. Overall EMA's top executive seemed upbeat about the whole ordeal:

"Today’s U.S. Supreme Court argument in Schwarzenegger v. EMA was both spirited and stimulating. I’m pleased that the justices recognized that the standard in the California law for restricting 'violent video games' to minors is unworkable in practice. I am confident that the justices will see beyond the facial appeal of restricting “violent video games” for minors and hold the law unconstitutional." - EMA President Bo Andersen.

 

Thanks Hal Halpin. More information about the EMA can be found at www.entertainmentmerchantsassociation.org/.

[GamePolitics is an ECA publication.]


Comments

Re: EMA President Issues Statement on SCOTUS Fight

The biggest sticking point seems to be: the gov't restricts porn sales to minors for no good reason so why shouldn't it restrict violent game sales to minors for no good reason?

 

Andrew Eisen

Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
tallimarhttp://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57440902-94/microsoft-legal-win-over-google-may-signal-ceasefire/05/24/2012 - 10:17pm
ZippyDSMleeTIme or an operation!05/24/2012 - 6:43pm
ZippyDSMleePC parts are in wish me luck or hell!!05/24/2012 - 6:43pm
MaskedPixelante38 Studios and Big Huge Games are pretty much dead now. http://www.joystiq.com/2012/05/24/38-studios-and-big-huge-games-lay-off-entire-staffs05/24/2012 - 4:39pm
DorthLousActually, nop, I did miss the emoticon for some reason (getting used to pics?) and I didn't know you changed it since (since I posted previous to my shout and it was still there.) Anyhow, thanks for taking it out!05/23/2012 - 6:01pm
james_fudgeWell we were just testing it. but it is still on the submission to fight $pam.05/23/2012 - 5:48pm
E. Zachary KnightJames, No I don't have it. I was just wondering who does and why. More curiosity than anything.05/23/2012 - 5:38pm
james_fudgeDid you not see the emoticon and did you not see that it has already been changed back?05/23/2012 - 5:10pm
james_fudgeLOL05/23/2012 - 5:07pm
DorthLousWhy? Not shocked that people are barking to an additional hoop to jump through when posting from their already logged in account or just mentionning this to try to paint me as one always complaining?05/23/2012 - 4:45pm
james_fudgebig shock there ;)05/23/2012 - 4:30pm
DorthLousI'll add my voice to those wanting it gone :S I'm already logged in, I don't need a captch'a. That's for those registering.05/23/2012 - 3:54pm
james_fudgeEt tu EZK?!?05/23/2012 - 3:51pm
Craig R.I'm a One Man Quorum! And it's working for me now, thanks. :)05/23/2012 - 3:48pm
E. Zachary KnightHow do we determine who get's the game/captcha thingy? Is there a certain posting threshhold users have to meet before it is turned off?05/23/2012 - 2:25pm
james_fudgeGive it a chance, we're still adjusting it ;)05/23/2012 - 11:20am
james_fudgeOne does not a Quorum make Craig.05/23/2012 - 11:16am
Craig R.If I complete the stupid game, and it just deletes my comment, what's the point?05/23/2012 - 11:15am
Craig R.Ok, the little captcha game? You can get rid of it already.05/23/2012 - 11:13am
Craig R.FCC boss is giving the thumbs up to usage-based pricing for Internet access05/23/2012 - 11:08am

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician