ESA to Sue MI Governor

Video Game Industry to Sue Michigan's Governor (thanks WarCry) has word on the ESA's efforts at countering recent legislation aimed at criminalizing the sale of Adult and Mature rated games to those under 17 years of age in Michigan (story). Here's a bit:
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 14, 2005--The computer and video game industry will file suit in Michigan asking that the state's new video game law be overturned, the Entertainment Software Association announced today. Similar laws were previously found unconstitutional and thrown out in St. Louis, Indianapolis, and Washington State, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

"If this law is implemented, it will not only limit First Amendment rights for Michigan's residents, but, by virtue of its vagueness, it will also create a huge amount of confusion for Michigan's retailers, parents, and video game developers," said Douglas Lowenstein, president of the ESA, the trade group representing U.S. computer and video game publishers. "I'm confident the court will affirm our position given the rulings on similar statutes in other jurisdictions; indeed, the facts, the science, the law, and the U.S. Constitution have not changed since those decisions were handed down."
View : : :
28.
 
Re: CMU didn't need that 1.4$ million anyway
Sep 14, 2005, 22:07
28.
Re: CMU didn't need that 1.4$ million anyway Sep 14, 2005, 22:07
Sep 14, 2005, 22:07
 
The IDSA countered June 19 with a motion to be reimbursed for attorneys' fees by St. Louis County in the amount of $170,882.40.

From the case in St. Louis.

But let's not let precedent get in your way.

No, the law is law unless/until it is overturned by the court or repealed by the legislature. There are no refunds. This is not like an unlawful tax which gets repealed.

From American Jurisprudence (found on wikipedia):

" The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed .. An unconstitutional law is void."

I'm sure you're a far superior resource of American law than AmJur, though.


This comment was edited on Sep 14, 22:12.
I eat pasta!
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
4.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
2.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
3.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
10.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
12.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
5.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
6.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
7.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
11.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
13.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
14.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
18.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
17.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
19.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
8.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
15.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
25.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
26.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
27.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
 28.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
      Re: CMU didn't need that 1.4$ million anyway
29.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
30.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
32.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
33.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
35.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
36.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
37.
Sep 15, 2005Sep 15 2005
38.
Sep 15, 2005Sep 15 2005
34.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
31.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
16.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
22.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
24.
Sep 14, 2005Sep 14 2005
39.
Sep 15, 2005Sep 15 2005
40.
Sep 15, 2005Sep 15 2005
  #37
41.
Sep 15, 2005Sep 15 2005
   Re: #37