SALT LAKE CITY, UT – Following two weeks of testimony that alternatively supported or argued against proposed legislation that would amend Utah’s definition of “material harmful to a minor” to include video games that incorporate “inappropriate violence,” the House Public Utilities and Technology Committee voted to place the measure on hold, according to multiple Utah media outlets.The proposed legislation, currently designated HB50, now has been halted three times in its journey through the State House of Representatives, according to the central Utah-based Daily Herald newspaper.
The bill is sponsored by Rep. Scott Wyatt (R-Logan), and was supported by testimony from the Utah Parent-Teachers Association and the Utah Eagle Forum, a conservative organization founded by activist Phyllis Schlafly in 1972.
According to the text of HB50, as posted to the website for the Utah State Legislature, the bill “amends the definition of material that is harmful to a minor to include inappropriate violence” and provides a definition of “inappropriate violence.”
Under the language of HB50, Utah State law would be amended so that the term “harmful to minors” would include “that quality of any description or representation, in
whatsoever form, of inappropriate violence.”
As defined in HB50, “inappropriate violence” includes “any description or representation, in an interactive video or electronic game, of violence that, taken as a whole; (a) appeals to the morbid interest of minors in violence; (b) is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors; and (c) does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.”
Laws with nearly identical statutory construction have been passed in several states, only to be quickly struck down by the courts as unconstitutional.
Those arguing against passing HB50 included Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, and Scott Sabey, an attorney who represents the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). Both argued that the bill will most likely be struck down by the courts as unconstitutional, and warned that such a law would inevitably lead to costly lawsuits for the state.
According to the Herald, Sabey noted that the Supreme Court has struck down similar laws previously, in part because the evidence supporting the alleged negative effects of violent video games on minors is very thin.
Citing the 2005 case ESA v Blagojevich, Sabey noted that the court issued a ruling stating that the studies provided in support of the legislation in that case presented “barely any evidence at all, let alone substantial evidence” of the purported negative effects of violent video games, asserting that the conclusions in the studies were “unsupported by scientific evidence.”
Members of the committee and some who testified alike, projected that a lawsuit could wind up costing the state as much as $1 million, especially if the state were to lose the case and the court were to order the state to compensate the plaintiff (which would likely be the ESA, already the victor in several such cases) for its own legal costs.
Rep. Kay McIff (R-Richfield) suggested as a possible substitute for HB50 a House Resolution directing the attorney general to submit amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs in support of other states currently fighting legal battles over similar legislation.
McIff said that while he shares the concern of the bill’s supporters that “there are serious consequence (sic) flowing from the continual exposure in our society to violence,” McIff was also swayed by Shurtleff’s testimony regarding the potential cost to the state of passing HB50.
“I am concerned, when all the legal experts, including our own attorney general as well as the sponsor, tell us that the bill is likely to fail in a constitutional challenge,” said McIff, according to the Herald. “One where we cannot control the amount we spend, because we spend our side and then we are potentially obliged to spend the legal costs of the other side.”
McIff added that he believes directing the attorney general to submit the amicus briefs would send the correct political message, while keeping the state out of costly litigation with little prospect for victory.
Rhonda Rose of the Utah PTA appeared before the Committee to declare her support for passing HB50, despite the possibility of legal challenges.
“We need these children not to be able to walk into the store and purchase these videos,” said Rose, according to the Herald. In spite of the likelihood that the law eventually would be declared unconstitutional, Rose said it is time for citizens to speak up and say “we want our families protected.”
Another supporter of HB50, Maryann Christensen of the Utah Eagle Forum, presented the committee with a map detailing incidents of school violence and asserted that 28 such incidents were connected to children playing violent video games.
“These are our little boys,” said Christensen of the offenders in the incidents, according to DeseretNews.com
Sabey conceded that the bill is “well intended,” but argued that HB50 overreaches, and fatally so from a legal and cultural perspective.
“If I choose to play this with my son,” said Sabey while holding up a copy of the game Call of Duty (a “Teen” rated game), “because I want him to understand the effect of the second World War, your legislation would subject me to a third-degree felony.”
Rep. Steven Mascaro (R-West Jordan), said that while he was sympathetic to the concerns of HB50’s supporters, he wants the committee to consider alternatives.
“I’m not convinced that there’s a problem [with violent video games],” Mascaro said, adding that he was worried, however, about the law having unintended negative consequences.
“You’ve got to be careful about killing flies with sledgehammers,” said Mascaro.
Other legislators opined that there may be no alternative to the “sledgehammer,” because even an ineffective and unenforceable law could lead to something being done about kids playing violent video games.
“No one pays attention until there’s a threat it’s going to be a law,” said Rep. Janice Fisher (D-West Valley).
The committee plans to discuss the measure further at a meeting Tuesday, January 30th, according to DeseretNews.com
