Activision Submits Extensive Defense in Call of Duty Uvalde School Shooting Lawsuit

Activision Rebuts Uvalde Lawsuit Claims, Citing First Amendment Protections

Activision Blizzard has filed a robust defense against lawsuits filed by Uvalde school shooting victims' families, vehemently denying any causal link between its Call of Duty franchise and the tragedy. The May 2024 lawsuits allege that the shooter's exposure to Call of Duty's violent content contributed to the massacre at Robb Elementary School on May 24, 2022, which claimed the lives of 19 children and two teachers.

The plaintiffs contend that Activision, alongside Meta (via Instagram), fostered an environment that normalized violence and weaponized impressionable youth. They highlight the shooter's history as a Call of Duty player and his use of an AR-15 rifle, similar to those depicted in the game.

Activision's December filing, a comprehensive 150-page response, rejects these claims outright. The company argues the lawsuit lacks merit and seeks dismissal under California's anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) laws, designed to safeguard free speech. The defense emphasizes Call of Duty's status as an expressive work protected by the First Amendment, countering the assertion that its "hyper-realistic content" incites violence.

Expert Testimony Bolsters Activision's Defense

Supporting its position, Activision submitted declarations from prominent experts. A 35-page statement from Notre Dame professor Matthew Thomas Payne contextualizes Call of Duty within the established tradition of military-themed entertainment, refuting the plaintiffs' "training camp" characterization. A further 38-page declaration from Patrick Kelly, Call of Duty's head of creative, details the game's development process, including the substantial $700 million budget allocated to Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War.

The Uvalde families have until late February to respond to Activision's extensive documentation. The legal battle highlights the ongoing societal debate surrounding the relationship between violent video games and real-world violence, with the outcome of this case holding significant implications.