Defence Filed in Activision Call of Duty School Shooting Case

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 lawsuits, initiated in May 2024, allege that the shooter's exposure to Call of Duty's violent content contributed to the horrific events of May 24, 2022, at Robb Elementary School.

The filings, totaling over 150 pages, reject all claims of culpability. Activision contends that the game, a work of expression protected by the First Amendment, cannot be held responsible for the actions of the shooter. The company's defense leverages California's anti-SLAPP laws, designed to shield free speech from frivolous litigation.

Expert Testimony Counters "Training Camp" Allegation

Central to Activision's defense is expert testimony refuting the plaintiffs' assertion that Call of Duty serves as a "training camp for mass shooters." A 35-page declaration from Notre Dame professor Matthew Thomas Payne contextualizes the game's military realism within the broader tradition of war-themed films and television. Further bolstering this argument is a 38-page submission from Patrick Kelly, Call of Duty's head of creative, detailing the game's development process and substantial budget (e.g., $700 million for Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War).

The plaintiffs, who also named Meta (via Instagram) as a defendant for allegedly facilitating the shooter's access to firearms advertising, have until late February to respond to Activision's comprehensive defense. This case continues a long-standing debate surrounding the potential influence of violent video games on real-world violence. The ultimate outcome remains uncertain.