Top Court Mulls Video Game Violence
The first day of deliberation in the Supreme Court about that perennial legal favorite, violence in video games, brought debate Tuesday about the potential damage done by minors' exposure to sex versus violence and a Founding Fathers joke from Justice Samuel Alito.
The first day of deliberation in the Supreme Court about that perennial legal favorite, violence in video games, brought debate Tuesday about the potential damage done by minors’ exposure to sex versus violence … and a Founding Fathers joke from Justice Samuel Alito.
TRUTHDIG’S JOURNALISM REMAINS CLEARLos Angeles Times:
The justices voted to hear California’s appeal, but they sounded split Tuesday.
Scalia insisted that since the nation’s founding, depictions of sex could be banned, but not depictions of violence and torture.
This drew a mocking rebuke from Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who is usually allied with Scalia on the conservative side.
When Scalia pressed the state’s lawyer to explain how the framers of the 1st Amendment would see the issue, Alito interjected: “What Justice Scalia wants to know is what James Madison thought about video games.” The remark elicited laughter in the courtroom.
The storytellers of chaos tried to manipulate the political and media narrative in 2025, but independent journalism exposed what they tried to hide. When you read Truthdig, you see through the illusion.
Support Independent Journalism.
Courts & Law
If you want to deepen your understanding of the differences between “originalism” and “living constitutionalism” as competing theories of constitutional law and interpretation, there’s no better place to begin than with the 2006 debate between the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the recently retired liberal Justice Stephen Breyer.
A new Second Amendment appeal could radically expand the scope of District of Columbia v. Heller, handicapping Congress for years to come.
The implications of Justice Thomas’ tenure on the nation’s top court extend far beyond his own career and legacy.
And with Neil Gorsuch and now Brett Kavanaugh in tow, the president is well on his way achieving his objective.
The confirmation of President Trump's nominee would mark the culmination of a right-wing legal counterrevolution that has been decades in the making.
The president has chosen a candidate who poses a great threat to progressive values and causes—and one who might shield him from Mueller.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.