"Defendants have failed to present substantial evidence showing that playing violent video games causes minors to have aggressive feelings or engage in aggressive behaviour...With these limited findings, it is impossible to know which way the causal relationship runs: it may be that aggressive children may also be attracted to violent video games." ...

"In this country, the state lacks the authority to ban protected speech on the ground that it affects the listener's or observer's thoughts and attitudes," the judge wrote.

It was certainly good news for groups such as the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, which helped launch the suit to block to the bill. IRMA president David Vite said, "It's unfortunate that the state of Illinois spent taxpayer money defending this statute. This is precisely what we told them would happen."

Entertainment Software Association president Doug Lowenstein also chimed in, noting that "this is the fifth decision of this type," suggesting that attempts to impose legal restrictions on game sales end up on shaky ground. The ESA is also contesting Hilary Clinton's recently proposed Family Entertainment Protection Act, which seeks to give the federal government certain degrees of power over the ESRB.