## Facts

- The City of Warren, Michigan enacted an ordinance barring minors (people under age 17) from “publicly associating with or being involved with video games and other mechanical amusements” unless accompanied by a parent or guardian.
- City lawmakers acted after receiving complaints from parents, school officials, neighboring businesses, and residents about vandalism, truancy, noise, litter, traffic problems, and increased crime linked to amusement centers such as arcades.
- Lawmakers also reported that children were spending lunch money on pinball and video games at arcades near schools instead of buying lunch, and then borrowing or stealing money from parents or other children.
- The city further believed video and pinball games could cause negative psychological effects in children, including gambling compulsions and addiction.
- Jacqueline Walker owned and operated Walker’s Pinball Arcade within the City of Warren.
- In January 1979, police officers found at least six people under age 17 inside Walker’s arcade without a parent or guardian present.
- Walker was cited for violating the ordinance, tried, convicted, and fined $500.
- Her conviction and fine were affirmed on appeal, and she then appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals, arguing the ordinance was unconstitutional.

## Issues

1. Does the ordinance violate First Amendment freedoms of expression and association by restricting unaccompanied minors under 17 from being in arcades and similar amusement centers?
2. Does the ordinance’s age-based classification violate state or federal equal protection guarantees?

## Decision

- The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed Walker’s conviction and upheld the ordinance.
- The court rejected the First Amendment challenge, concluding the ordinance regulated minors’ presence in a commercial amusement setting rather than protected expression or protected association.
- The court rejected the equal protection challenge, applying rational-basis review and finding the ordinance reasonably related to legitimate governmental purposes, including protecting minors and addressing harms linked to amusement centers.

## Legal Principles

- A Michigan home-rule city may enact ordinances under its police power to address public health, safety, and welfare concerns, including rules aimed at minors.
- Not every recreational activity involving games constitutes protected expression for First Amendment purposes; a rule controlling minors’ access to commercial amusements may be treated as regulation of conduct rather than speech.
- Freedom of association primarily safeguards intimate or expressive association; gathering at an arcade for recreational play is not the sort of association that triggers heightened First Amendment protection.
- Age is not a suspect classification, and access to arcade games is not a fundamental right; equal protection challenges to such regulations are generally reviewed under the rational-basis standard.
- Under rational-basis review, the city need only show a reasonable relationship between the ordinance and legitimate governmental aims; it need not select the least restrictive alternative.

## Conclusion

*City of Warren v. Walker* upheld Warren’s ordinance requiring minors under 17 to be accompanied by a parent or guardian when involved with video games and other mechanical amusements in amusement centers such as arcades. The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the arcade owner’s conviction and fine, holding that the ordinance did not infringe First Amendment expression or association rights and that the age-based restriction satisfied equal protection because it was reasonably related to legitimate objectives such as reducing truancy, nuisance conditions, and crime, and protecting minors from perceived harms associated with arcades.


City of Warren v. Walker, 354 N.W.2d 312, 135 Mich. App. 267 (1984)