re: #70 HappyWarrior

Man, Thomas I can see but disappointed that Breyer dissented from that.

I wrote a grad school paper on that case. I got to know it pretty well.

The dissent by Thomas was incoherent and useless. He basically says that because parents have the absolute right to control their children and, more to the point, control access to their children, they have the absolute right to have the state control access to their children, even if it means restricting speech. You know, because the Founders would never have understood the freedom of speech to include a right to speak to children without going through their parents. Or something.

The dissent by Breyer was based on his belief that correlation = causation and that kids need to be protected from video games. Not only did he blatantly pad his dissent with a 15 page list of articles that claimed a potential link between video games and violence in children, but he thought that the California law was a minor restraint on speech at best.