|
Posted by adam.dada on July 23rd, 2008
Chicago, IL
By A.B. Dada
—
On slashdot this morning was an article with the same title above: Videogame Labeling Law passed in New York. Their article states:
A law just passed in New York now requires labels for violent content in video games that are already rated, as well as having parent-controlled lockout features installed in consoles by 2010. The law has caused an uproar with civil rights groups who claim that such a law is unconstitutional. A legal challenge is already in the works by the New York Civil Liberties Union who cite that similar laws that have been brought to courts in California, Illinois, Minessota, and Washington state have been deemed as unconstitutional. NYCLU legislative director Robert Perry also says that the ‘new law is a “back door” way of regulating video game content.’
While many additional libertarians, civil or otherwise, will be crying foul against this law, I posted the following as a comment:
Is it confusing to anyone why such a law would be deemed unconstitutional? It makes no sense to me. If they’re crying “1st Amendment violation!” we should note instantly that this is not the U.S. Congress passing a law infringing on the freedom of expression. This is a State-level body declaring their right, via the 9th and 10th Amendments, to regulate speech.
Now some of you are saying “Whoa, Mr. Anarchy says it’s OK for States to regulate speech!” According to the U.S. Constitution, they can. If their own State Constitution has a declaration of what they can’t do, and I hope many States do, then they should be bound by that. But if the People of a State decide that they want their speech regulated and restricted, nothing in the U.S. Constitution should prevent them from deciding it’s OK to be nannied to death by their State governments.
I’m all for dismantling the State, piece by piece, top-down, but in this case, I don’t see what the issue is. As long as the U.S. Congress does not try this tactic, as far as I know, it’s constitutional, and people will get what they deserve at the State level.
The U.S. Constitution is a series of rules that govern what the Federal government can do and what it can’t do. It does not cover the individual States. If the plebes of New York wish for their government to regulate their expressions, so be it. The U.S. Constitution does not limit New York’s power to destroy the inherent rights of the citizens of New York.
Of course New York’s Constitution might restrict their own government’s ability to infringe on the freedom of expression, but I have not read New York’s Constitution to see what their limits on government are.
If you support the U.S. Constitution, you should see that this law has nothing to do with the U.S. Congress, Judicial Branch or Executive Branch.
