Question

In Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, the Supreme Court held:

a. California's prohibition on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors and special packaging requirement violated the First Amendment because California failed to justify the law with a compelling government interest and the law is narrowly drawn to serve that interest.
b. California's prohibition on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors and special packaging requirement did not violate the First Amendment because California appropriately justified the law with a compelling government interest and the law is narrowly drawn to serve that interest.
c. California's prohibition on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors and special packaging requirement did not violate the First Amendment because video games are not entitled to First Amendment protection.
d. California's prohibition on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors and special packaging requirement violated the First Amendment because California failed to justify the law with a rational relationship to a legitimate government interest.

Answer 1

A

Step-by-step explanation:

The US Supreme Court did rule that the California law prohibiting the sale or rental of violent video games to minors violated the First Amendment. The reason for the violation is that the law had extended the concept of obscenity, reserved for sexual materials, to violent materials. According to Justice Antonin Scalia who rejected the state’s argument that violent video games could qualify as obscenity, the state had failed to show a connection between exposure to violent games and harmful impacts on children. Therefore, the recited harms are not real and the law does not have a compelling state interest.