In perhaps the first punishment of its kind, a judge has recently banned a 16-year-old from playing any violent video games. His sentence was passed by Judge Robert Anderson of Illinois after the teen made a threat on SnapChat about a possible school shooting. The ruling stated that the teenager was on indefinite home detention, would have no phone, and would not be allowed to play any violent video games whatsoever.

The Illinois teenager, apparently frustrated with his school’s closure based on possible threats, took to Snapchat to voice his irritation. He posted a picture of himself playing a video game with a caption reading “Y’all need to shut up about school shootings or I’ll do one.”

What makes this case so unique, however, is that the judge felt that the best punishment for the teen was to deny him access to his phone and violent video games in particular. In fact, Judge Anderson went so far as to tell the teen, “You can play all the Mario Kart you want.” This would indicate that the punishment isn’t designed to deny the teen fun, but it is specifically targeting violent video games as the root of the teen’s problem.

This comes following President Trumps statements at a meeting about school shootings. At the meeting, he said that the government needs to look into violent video games because, in his words:  

There has been a long history of interest in whether or not violent video games have any link to violent actions. Like music and film in the 80s, video games carried the brunt of criticism in the 90s, specifically in 1993 with the release of Mortal Kombat and also in 1999 following the Columbine shooting.

Despite constant interest in the psychological effects of violent video games on children, no link has ever been found between the fiction of video games and the reality of real world violence. In fact, numerous studies have purported that there is no link whatsoever between violent altercations and video games.

However, following President Trump’s remarks and this recent ruling, gamers may expect a crackdown on video games. This may be especially true in regards to the law, which may begin including video game restrictions on cases in the future.

Previous legislation has only ever been designed to increase the restrictions of minor’s access to video games, but the ESRB has little power to enforce beyond labeling. Recent controversies surrounding loot boxes have put increased pressure on the ESRB, but few realize that the organization has no legal authority. Because of this, there is no real way to limit video games – violent or otherwise – more than they already are. This is especially true considering the fact that the industry is now worth over $9 billion and would likely battle strongly against any moves made to further limit it. It may all be bluster, as it was in the 90s, but it shows that the debate over video games violence is still very much alive.