SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

January 11, 2011 -

The Atlantic Wire asks the question "What Does the Constitution Say About Video Games?" by pointing to a New York Times article about the Supreme Court's "originalists." These justices, led by Justice Scalia, believe the law "should adhere as closely as possible to the Constitution's text and to the founders' original intentions," according to the Atlantic Wire.

So what does this mean as it relates to new technology the founding fathers could have never imagined like video games?

Here is some of what the New York Times article said about it:

"In addition to disagreeing about the value of previous precedents, the conservative justices disagree among themselves about what the founders would have thought about technologies and institutions that didn’t exist when the Constitution was written.

In a November oral argument about a California law restricting minors from buying violent video games, Justices Scalia and Samuel A. Alito debated whether the ratifiers of the First Amendment would have thought that it protected portrayals of violence.

'What Justice Scalia wants to know is what James Madison thought about video games,' and if 'he enjoyed them,' Justice Alito said sarcastically. Justice Scalia shot back, 'No, I want to know what James Madison thought about violence.' The dispute will be resolved in the opinion, to be issued later this year.

The point of both articles is pretty clear: strict originalism cannot always address issues that aren't black and white.. like video games and violence. However, technology really has nothing to do with it; the founding fathers would deal with video games the way they would deal with movies, music, television and literature - as forms of free speech.


Comments

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

You cannot snatch up those from that period in time and bring them here and hope they magically understand all the other social changes that occurred between their time and our time.

They would have had to actually have evolved along with society over the hundreds of years since their time til now.

That does not mean they would have HAD to have accepted the changes that occurred over time.  But as society evolved, and they lived through those changes, they would have been able to grasp those changes much easier than to be suddenly thrust from then to now.

I've always found the argument of "The Founding Fathers never meant for the US Constitution to do or include so-n-so".  The Founding Fathers of the US Constitution TRIED to make it as neutral and generic as possible.  To deal with probable changes within their understanding that may still have conflicted with their own personal beliefs.  The Constitution was not written to defend only THEIR beliefs and no one elses.  And it was designed sufficiently to BE Amended in case there were situations they could not anticipate or predict.  That was quite clear as it CAN be Amended.

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000

Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Nightwng2000 NW2K Software http://www.facebook.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

I always think of it as siding with the average person and their freedoms the most (say a persons right to back up and play their copies vrs a companies right to prevent it via the courts, they have the right to create DRM and online activations and what not but the public has the right to bypass it legally or should).  Basically an individuals right dose not easily get over turned or mitigated(made illegal, stupid dose not make something worthy of law,IE j walking), the right bare weapons is a right it should be unquestioned, you deal with the crime that happens after the fact not go bat shit loco over every instances of quasi questionable purchases or stock piles(unless you can track crimes from said stock pile). Of course we need a better system to keep felons away from weapons anything more than that is really un needed. 

 

The trouble tho is president the courts have said X or Y over the years and thus the law has been derived from that and not the constitution itself, that is a problem with modern law and modern government we are not following a distilled founding rather we are following what has been derived from and after awhile it becomes sewage...


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

Just because Scalia says he's an "Originalist" does not make it so. It's funny how the Founding Fathers all seem to agree with Scalia's political views despite clear historical evidence that they did not. He's intellectually dishonest at best, and an outright liar at worst. Never forget that.

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

The tricky part about trying to get inside the founder's heads..... for starters, there were many founders with a variety of views and goals.  The Constitution and Bill of Rights were both compromise documents that were arrived at though a long series of arguments.. and they had some vagueness built into them because different states wanted wiggle room to do things that other states did not want them doing.

There was also a very different worldview back then, that the justices should be careful about using as a meter stick.  For instance there was quite a bit of 'well of course we don't mean (insert group) should be protected'.. which of course the 'originalists' like to point to as proof that the Bill of Rights was not meant to apply to everyone.  Why should they be careful?  Well, for starters... Catholics and Jews were two of those groups that it was just assumed that religious protections would not be extended to.... so Originalists, if they were truly keeping to those early assumptions that they use to back up their prejudice.. only 2 of the justices would find their personal faith protected.

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

I dunno you can always depend on it to tilt to an individual's freedom regulated by the state they are in. If you try and do more than that that you are just practicing disingenuity.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

Games have plot, stories, make people laugh, cry. They are as much as art that movies, books, TV and music is. Here is hoping the SCOTUS agrees.

Re: SCOTUS 'Originalists' and Video Games

Though, sometimes those tears come for the wrong reasons, like playing a troll game (Kaizo Mario, IWBTG) or a highly glitched/bugged game (Alpha Protocol, New Vegas)

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which Feminist Frequency video are you looking forward to most?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
prh99Devolvers response to Nintendo's creator program https://mobile.twitter.com/devolverdigital/status/56082061398444851301/31/2015 - 3:24am
Andrew EisenI only know of him being annoyed that IGDA mistakenly hosted on its anti-harassment tools page a blocklist he was on. What else was he critical of?01/31/2015 - 2:19am
Goth_Skunk@WonderKarp: Given Rosario's outspoken criticisms of the conduct of the IGDA, I would not be one bit surprised if he's being strong-armed into silence in closed-door meetings. He's not towing the party line, after all.01/30/2015 - 11:38pm
MechaTama31EZK: Thank you! (And I was able to see that you did it, only because you did it. How appropriate! :)01/30/2015 - 11:37pm
Matthew Wilson@Monte Nintendo is a Japanese company though. consoles are dead in japan. ps sony is a international company, so they do not much care about Japanese sales much.01/30/2015 - 10:11pm
MonteOnly one generation ago nintnedo had the best selling console. They know their games are still popular and can move their hardware. They just need to focus on better gaming hardware and advertising (their youtube policy not helping)01/30/2015 - 9:58pm
MonteI'd expect Nintendo to keep making consoles, much like the gamecube i doubt nintendo will see the Wii U as a sign of the end for consoles. There are multiple reason why the Wii U failed a big one being marketting.01/30/2015 - 9:55pm
Wonderkarpwhen asked on Twitter, the Chairman said He couldnt comment at this time https://twitter.com/siloraptor/status/561284497275367424. still looking for facts01/30/2015 - 9:41pm
Wonderkarphttp://pressfarttocontinue.com/2015/01/30/igda-puerto-rico-closed/ this is what I have so far01/30/2015 - 9:27pm
Wonderkarpso allegedly, IGDA has closed their Puerto Rico branch. This comes after the Chairman of the Puerto Rico branch was blocklisted by Randi Harper. I'm trying to dig up more info on it. all I have is a link with some info, but its not cited.01/30/2015 - 9:27pm
Andrew EisenSo, kinda like the Wii U just with a GamePad that's portable?01/30/2015 - 9:13pm
Matthew Wilson@AE I hope they do a Ipad/iphone thing. make a home console/handheld where games are playable on both. that is what I would want from them.01/30/2015 - 9:00pm
Andrew EisenThat would be a shame but as long as I can play comfortably on my TV I'll probably be fine with whatever the future brings.01/30/2015 - 8:56pm
Matthew Wilson@AE I would get used to it. I do not think nintendo is going to do another home console , but I suspect a hybrid one. 1. they are doing worse than the gamecube. 2. the home console market is dead in japan. even the ps4 isnt selling there.01/30/2015 - 8:54pm
Andrew EisenAside from that (and the aiming isn't too smooth but it's turn based so it's not a big deal (maybe better with Circle Pad Pro or New 3DS?)) my only other quibble is I'd much prefer playing it on a console. But I say that about nearly every handheld game.01/30/2015 - 8:39pm
Andrew EisenFrom what I've seen of Valkyria Chronicles, this is significantly slower. Mechanically, it's fine and plays into the game well. It just takes too long.01/30/2015 - 8:37pm
Matthew Wilsonyup like VC it moves every enemy each turn one by one.01/30/2015 - 8:33pm
Andrew EisenI played most of the Codename Steam demo. Pretty neat so far but the enemy turn (it's turn based) takes way too long.01/30/2015 - 8:31pm
Goth_SkunkJust finished the first episode of Life is Strange. The writing is hit-or-miss, the lip-syncing is awful (but I can't fault an indie dev for that), but the chronokinesis mechanic is dynamite. Love the concept. Can't wait to play more.01/30/2015 - 8:23pm
Andrew EisenNintendo invites disaster!01/30/2015 - 7:34pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician