2017•Lincoln (University of Nebraska)Open access
Newbs Lose, Experts Win: Video Games in the Supreme Court
Angela Campbell
Open full text 0 citations
Abstract
I. Introduction II. The Advantage of a Supreme Court Expert ... A. California’s Counsel ... B. Entertainment Merchant Association’s (EMA) Counsel III. Background on the Video Game Cases ... A. Cases Prior to Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n ... B. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n ... 1. Before the District Court ... 2. Before the Ninth Circuit ... 3. Supreme Court IV. Comparison of Expert and Non-Expert Representation in Brown ... A. Merits Briefs ... 1. Statement of Facts ... a. California’s Statement of Facts ... b. EMA’s Statement of Facts ... c. A More Effective Statement of Facts ... 2. Arguments ... a. Standard of Review ... b. California’s Arguments ... c. EMA’s Arguments ... 3. California’s Risky Strategy ... B. Alternative Arguments ... 1. Facial Challenge ... 2. Intermediate Scrutiny ... 3. Whose First Amendment Rights? ... 4. Strict Scrutiny ... C. Amicus Briefs ... 1. Briefs Supporting California ... 2. Briefs Supporting EMA ... 3. Influence of the Amicus Briefs on the Justices … D. Oral Argument ... 1. Role of Experience ... 2. Quantitative Analysis ... 3. Qualitative Analysis ... a. Morazzini’s Oral Argument ... b. Smith’s Oral Argument V. Did Advocacy Matter? VI. Conclusion Appendix
Open-access reader