Break your new game laws, before they disappear

So Louisiana has enacted a law prohibiting the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. At this point they clearly aren't even trying; the law is so obviously unconstitutional that this is just posturing.

The law prohibits the sale or rental of a game if:

(1) The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the video or computer game, taken as a whole, appeals to the minor's morbid interest in violence. (2) The game depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community with respect to what is suitable for minors. (3) The game, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

Every similar law has been found unconstitutional because violent content is not considered obscenity by the courts, and therefore is protected speech under the First Amendment. Most laws try to get around this by claiming that violent games cause harm to the community; this argument falls flat because the courts have repeatedly found studies purporting to link violent games and violent behavior are worthless. But the Louisiana law doesn't even bother making this claim! Nor does it deal with sexually explicit games, which could be restricted under the First Amendment (though most video games would not be explicit enough to be restricted, a law restricting sexually explicit games is not on its face unconstitutional).

Also including that third part of the test (if the game lacks literary or artistic merit) is a further mistake, since every single court ruling striking down video game laws has clearly established that this is not a valid test for restricting video game sales. Here's one:

"If the First Amendment is versatile enough to "shield (the) painting of Jackson Pollock, music of Arnold Schoenberg, or Jabberwocky verse of Lewis Carroll,' - we see no reason why the pictures, graphic design, concept art, sounds, music, stories, and narrative present in video games are not entitled to a similar protection. The mere fact that they appear in a novel medium is of no legal consequence."

For more on why these laws are doomed to fail, see this essay and these posts.