What Clarence Thomas's Video-Games Dissent Tells Us About
'Originalism'  By Garrett Epps  The Justice's interpretation of
the Constitution is one of pick-and-choose history   There is
much to chew over in the Supreme Court's two First Amendment
decisions, Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association and
Arizona's Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett.
They provide an intriguing contrast in First Amendment
methodology, and though both reach nominally speech-protecting
results, they do so with differing rationale and differing
lineups on the various sides of the issue.  But one thing is
liable to be lost in the result: Justice Thomas's dissent in
Entertainment Merchants Association, the violent video games
case, which provides a revealing window in the limits (if that
is the term) of the "originalist" methodology. It's easy to
ignore Thomas's solo dissents, which seem destined for
obscurity; but they are often fascinating reading.  As I've
written before, "originalists" like to claim that they are