American Amusement Machine Association v. Kendrick

244 F.3d 572 (2001)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

American Amusement Machine Association v. Kendrick

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
244 F.3d 572 (2001)

Facts

An Indianapolis city ordinance prohibited operators of five or more video-game machines in one place from allowing unaccompanied minors to use a video-game machine that was “harmful to minors.” The term harmful to minors was defined to include video-game machines that depicted graphic violence (i.e., a realistic visual depiction or representation of serious physical injury to a human or human-like character). The ordinance also provided that video-game machines with content harmful to minors had to be labeled with warning signs and separated from other video-game machines by a partition that would conceal the purportedly harmful content from view. The city passed the ordinance because city lawmakers believed that minors who played violent video games would become violent. The American Amusement Machine Association (the association) (plaintiff), a trade association of video-game manufacturers, brought an action in federal district court against Indianapolis city prosecutor Teri Kendrick and other government officials (defendants), seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of the ordinance. The association claimed that the ordinance violated the First Amendment freedom of expression. The district court denied the association’s request for injunctive relief, reasoning that although video games are speech for purposes of the First Amendment, the ordinance would be unconstitutional only if the city did not have a reasonable basis for believing that the ordinance would protect children from harm. The district court found that a reasonable basis existed because two psychological studies had found that young people who played violent video games exhibited aggressive attitudes and behavior. However, the studies had not found that video games had ever caused someone to commit a violent act or had caused actual increased violence anywhere. The association appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 741,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership