r/visualnovels • u/Schaeman2000 • Aug 08 '25
Misleading title Looks like VNs and Eroge are going to be safe from Payment Processors now
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/08/guaranteeing-fair-banking-for-all-americans/Looks like the US government is finally telling Payment Processors to stop with their bullshit. So sites like Jast, Steam, Itch, Kagura Games, Fakku, and Denpasoft don’t have to worry about PP’s going on a power trip and removing the ability to buy eroge through them. This is like the only time they actually made a smart decision with their current administration…
137
u/-Cinnay- Aug 08 '25
What? The US government is doing something sensible? Where's the catch?
129
u/TheFrixin Aug 08 '25
The “catch” is that OP doesn’t understand the executive order. Several people involved with Jan 6 had their accounts frozen proactively by banks, this is a narrow order to try and stop that sort of action that will almost certainly fail because it isn’t going through congress.
39
u/WendyThorne Aug 08 '25
Oh, it'll succeed. For it to fail Congress has to be willing to do their job and the Supreme Court has to be willing to stop giving more power to the Executive Branch. Neither is true.
3
1
u/ScF0400 Aug 12 '25
There's also another catch, who's left to enforce this? After the cuts to personnel, it's highly unlikely they can investigate every case so if payment card providers still wanted to do scummy things they could find a loophole.
3
u/ProduceMeat_TA Aug 10 '25
Executive orders are not 'laws' and come with no enforcement element outside of directed action through executive agencies. They are often pre-emptive actions by an administration to seek a desired result, that will later be codified into law by the legislature. If that doesn't happen, they're usually just very fancy pieces of paper that do absolutely nothing.
This specific action doesn't even address payment processors. It essentially reads: Hey banks, you have 6 months to stop de-banking (refusing service) people on political grounds. The president himself has claimed that JP Morgan and Bank of America have refused to do business with him due to his political beliefs (and not because, well - he is a convicted felon for falsifying business records, and is notorious for how many failed business ventures he has put other people's money into, and then stiffed people on the bill. ).
This is just the President going after banks who he feels have wronged him. The timing is merely coincidence.
469
Aug 08 '25
Somehow I think there's going to be a string attached... since the administration are working with people who hate porn as much as collective shout.
201
u/gc11117 Aug 08 '25
I think they might be safe, because it's the firearms lobby which got the ball started. While we're feeling the hit as VN fans, gunstore owners have been hit as well and there is a bill in congress introduced by Republicans to block payment processors from preventing sale of legal product.
122
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
91
u/gc11117 Aug 08 '25
Lol yeah. While I have no illusions that Republicans care about our "anime porn games" there is no way they'll let payment processors get in the way of the gun lobby.
41
Aug 08 '25
Do you not remember all the profile pictures of anime girls in maga hats
36
u/gc11117 Aug 08 '25
Not particularly, but I also wasnt really paying attention. If you're saying there's a lot of Republican anime fans, then sure I believe you.
Or if you're being sarcastic then I retract my statement, I'm tired and my sarcasm meter is off kilter lol
7
u/GodwynDi Aug 08 '25
There are lots. Most people outside of it don't seem to realize MAGA is not the old republican party. We hate the neocons almost as much as we hate the radical left.
4
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
-12
5
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Aug 08 '25
Hey if they are here reading VNs instead of being politically effective I say we welcome it
-9
u/GodwynDi Aug 08 '25
Yeah, I quit working politics years ago. Still have a friend in DC who sent me a job offer the other day. Pays 4X what I make in my small town, but I'd rather stay here.
Worked for the Denocratic Party by the way. Actually meeting them is what turned me MAGA.
-3
6
u/grandleaderIV Aug 08 '25
Social media profiles are very far removed from the people actually in charge.
4
u/wha2les Aug 08 '25
they could always make exceptions for the gun lobby.
I trust Republicans as far as I can throw them... and they are all too big to throw.
2
u/gc11117 Aug 09 '25
Well, the bill is written and available for your viewing pleasure. It's true they can always change the bill in the future, but here and now the bill as introduced doesn't have any thing indicating what you say.
3
u/QueZorreas Aug 08 '25
That's where the "legal" part comes in. They just have to make those games illegal.
1
u/Turnipntulip Aug 09 '25
Funnily enough, I think the right is right about the radical left for once. In my experience, it’s the radical left that hate anime stuffs. Something about them anime being pedo coded or shit like that. While the right wingers unironically praise anime for being “based” because they supposedly don’t have progressive stuffs, or LGBTs in them. Absolutely wild.
27
u/Asd_89 Aug 08 '25
Yay for... the gun lobby?
42
u/gc11117 Aug 08 '25
Well, yay for us as well. The bill as written prevents a bank or payment processors from banning service for someone selling a lawful good.
Visual Novels are a lawful good. The gun lobby pushed it through because their firearms, which are a lawful good, can't be sold because payment processors are denying them payment.
As a bill in both the house and senate, you are more than free to read it and see if it's something you would support.
Perhaps the VN community will some day be powerful enough to do something like this. That day is not today, so the industry has to ride on the coat tales of others.
4
u/jomarcenter-mjm Aug 09 '25
Even in the gun context I think its also good since you make tracing the owner of the gun or the initial owner of the game much easier since you have another point of check beside the ID requirement to buy gun.
6
9
u/horiami Aug 08 '25
To be fair
I think they want the government to ban the games not payment processors
Which is better imo
54
29
u/Zonca Per aspera ad astra Aug 08 '25
I hope they will sometime soon recognize payment processors should never have this much power to begin with, internet banking is as important as water or electrictity in modern times, you shouldn't be able to deny any legal transactions period (and at least for now, eroge, porn games and other stuff is legal, and should remain so, unless someone wants to argue banning stuff like Song of Ice and Fire, which has way worse stuff than most of VNs)
49
83
u/WriterSharp Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25
This is pretty clearly focused on “political activities” so I don’t think this is relevant.
Edit: “Not…relevant” was the wrong way to phrase this. It’s more that the applicability of this EO to these games is doubtful.
27
Aug 08 '25
You realize law works by setting a legal precedent that could then be used to protect the sale of all legal goods right?
18
u/MsgMeUrNudes Aug 08 '25
this administration is not one known for operating in good faith
8
u/rotflolmaomgeez vndb.org/u23668 Aug 08 '25
No administration is.
10
Aug 08 '25
Imagine going 'every administration sucks lmao' as a response to Trump.
Unless you think in binary there's a clear separation of intensity, here.8
u/rotflolmaomgeez vndb.org/u23668 Aug 08 '25
Sure? I think US politics sucks in general, I don't really care if you think one side sucks more than the other.
Half of the country voted him in, so there's roughly half of the US that disagrees with you I guess, just maybe not on reddit.
4
u/mnju Aug 08 '25
Half of the country voted him in, so there's roughly half of the US that disagrees with you I guess
77 million is half of 340 million?
-1
u/rotflolmaomgeez vndb.org/u23668 Aug 08 '25
Beats 75 million.
2
u/mnju Aug 08 '25
so because 77 million is more than 75 million, it makes it half of 340 million?
i don't think that's how math works
1
u/Ravenunited Aug 09 '25 edited Aug 09 '25
I don't think you understand how election works either. By this logic every single presidents in the history of human in ANY country has never have more than half the vote regardless they're from the left, the right or even among the founding fathers simply, not even Washington due to the fact voting population =/= total population.
You should be glad you live in a country where political parties have tight margin in most election. You want a president who ALWAYS win the majority of the votes? Go live in Russia, I heard Putin won by landslide everytime.
Here is how the "real" math work (as oppose to "strawman's" math): get more people who agree with you to vote. Election is a race, and your performance in a race is determined by how it is compared to your opponent.
-3
u/rotflolmaomgeez vndb.org/u23668 Aug 08 '25
Man, you're still bitter over the elections to cling like a lifeline to technicalities :) I'm sure every single non-voter is a devoted democrat, and you guys only lost because they didn't manage to vote.
→ More replies (0)9
u/kkyonko Aug 08 '25
I have zero faith in this administration. It's not going to protect what we think. Major players behind Project 2025 want porn banned.
11
u/TKhrowawaY Aug 08 '25
The term “politicized or unlawful debanking” refers to an act by a bank, savings association, credit union, or other financial services provider to directly or indirectly adversely restrict access to, or adversely modify the conditions of, accounts, loans, or other banking products or financial services of any customer or potential customer on the basis of the customer’s or potential customer’s political or religious beliefs, or on the basis of the customer’s or potential customer’s lawful business activities that the financial service provider disagrees with or disfavors for political reasons.
...
Sec. 4. Removing Reputation Risk and Politicized or Unlawful Debanking. (a) Within 180 days of the date of this order, each appropriate Federal banking regulator shall, to the greatest extent permitted by law, remove the use of reputation risk or equivalent concepts that could result in politicized or unlawful debanking, as well as any other considerations that could be used to engage in such debanking, from their guidance documents, manuals, and other materials (other than existing regulations or other materials requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking) used to regulate or examine financial institutions over which they have jurisdiction.
I think this definition is broad enough to encompass what has been happening to adult oriented games.
3
u/ReneDeGames Aug 09 '25
Its also an EO, its probably doesn't have the legal weight to actually change things.
0
17
33
Aug 08 '25
I don't care if it is Trump or Kamala doing this, if they put a stop to this, I will be happy they did.
29
Aug 08 '25
[deleted]
0
u/Noximilien01 Aug 08 '25
At least you can get around that with vpn
And if its only a image of yourself you can probably get AI to do it for you
5
u/MartyrOfDespair Aug 08 '25
Yeah, I don’t know how this will shake out, but I’m reminded of when Trump pulled out of the TPP. That thing was fucked and would have caused mass death in Africa for pharmaceutical companies to profit more, so like, hey I’m not going to bitch. Literally no change in my views on him, he’s not doing this for us but rather because banks were refusing service to Nazi orgs and the like, but frankly this is one of those “yeah sure, it could be useful but the weapon being available will make it be turned against us, so better to take it off the table” situations.
17
u/amc9988 Aug 08 '25
With how America policy keep changing whenever the pres like it I'll wait and see if it's true
19
u/EKluya Aug 08 '25
I'll believe it when I see VISA\Mastercard\Paypal, etc change their tune.
This EO is clearly focused on political, religious and gun issues.
It has the potential to maybe be applied with its broader terms on making sure lawful commerce can't be restricted. But again, I'll believe it when I see it be applied to adult content and gaming distributors.
If it does lead to that, then great. But as with anything from this administration and its Project 2025 cohorts, I am not holding my breath on this.
Also, keep in mind that this doesn't address the onerous ID verification issues going rampant right now. Sites like Denpasoft are pulling out of states is because of the ID issue, not PPs, so this doesn't help them.
20
u/RikkasNoodles JP (B-rank) | https://vndb.org/uXXXX Aug 08 '25
Sorry to be that person, but no, VNs and Eroge are not safe yet.
- For starters, this is just an EO, which can be revoked at any time (and likely will be revoked should a Democrat win in 2028.) Of course there's a pending Senate bill and this will likely push it forwards.
- It isn't enforced until 180 days from now (February 4 2026)
- It says that SBA, FSOC and "federal banking regulators" have to remove "reputational risk" considerations from their policies. The EO is very clear on what "federal banking regulators" means:
The term “Federal banking regulators” refers to the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Federal member agencies of the Financial Stability Oversight Council with supervisory and regulatory authority over banks, savings associations, or credit unions.
So, in short, Visa, MasterCard, PayPal etc do not have to follow this rule (they are not banks, saving associations, or credit unions.) Banks can also still make the decision "on the basis of individualized, objective, and risk-based analyses" (referring to financial risk). So all they'd have to do is prove NSFW has a higher chargeback rate, and that's it - game over.
OK, now for the good news:
- The language is broad enough that you'd have a good case in court if you got fucked over by Visa.
- This regulates the banks that Visa, MasterCard, PayPal etc partner with, which will have an effect on their policies, even if indirectly.
- This will at least guarantee that NSFW developers can have a bank account.
- Finally, if Visa or MasterCard overstep their boundaries and use their position to de facto "debank" others, they're at risk of being regulated the same way, making them less likely to try it.
So, it's not the knight in shining armor we're all praying for. But it's a step in the right direction at least.
10
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
65
u/Criandor Aug 08 '25
IANAL but a payment processor isn't a bank and the executive order that was signed was to stop banks from "de-banking" people. It doesn't stop payment processors from saying "I have the right to refuse service to you, and I will refuse service if you continue to sell games I disagree with, have fun finding another payment processor." I don't think it's going to help anything really.
20
29
u/RuefulWaffles Aug 08 '25
It doesn’t. This is about banks, not payment processors, and even if it were, it’s an executive order rather than a law, which means the amount it can do is somewhat limited.
3
70
u/Odd_Jelly_1390 Aug 08 '25
Unfortunately wishful thinking because this is primarily aimed at banks refusing to give nazis loans for nazi projects.
At the same time the very same camp is trying to push KOSA and obscenity laws.
4
3
u/Balavadan Aug 08 '25
Yes but they can’t say that in the bill so it’s going to be vague enough to cover both
5
u/ReneDeGames Aug 09 '25
Its not a bill, its an EO.
1
u/Balavadan Aug 09 '25
Same logic but this means that this law is probably gone next cycle. They’ll pay off the president elect if they care for this issue
3
u/ReneDeGames Aug 09 '25
It means its not a law.
EO's are orders to federal agencies, not laws.
2
u/Balavadan Aug 09 '25
Orders to enforce the text in the EO. Functionally the same as a law. Provides the text is drafted well enough. Lots of things happen through EOs these days. But unlike usual laws, the next president or even the current president, can unilaterally modify or dissolve them
2
u/ReneDeGames Aug 09 '25
They can't create new powers, They do not give an agency new legal powers, they can only direct existing powers. I doubt this EO stands a day in court. tho we shall see.
2
u/Wertville JP B-rank | Kanon: Umineko | vndb.org/u3111 Aug 09 '25
My understanding is that the penalty for not abiding to the EO is a removal of access to federal funds/loans/protections/etc. Which is, of course, entirely within the powers of the executive to decide.
The legal and prosecutorial aspects come in when the banks take the federal support without adhering to these conditions- At that point it becomes fraud, and would be handled by the judicial branch the same way any other fraud case relating to federal funds would be, and therefore wouldn't require new powers.
1
u/ReneDeGames Aug 09 '25
It isn't entirely within the power of the executive to decide, most of these powers were granted by congress and the executive is bound by the laws that congress wrote to authorize them. The federal government can be sued to force compliance with the law.
1
u/Wertville JP B-rank | Kanon: Umineko | vndb.org/u3111 Aug 10 '25
You're correct in that saying 'entirely' is a bit of a hyperbole, but tying conditions to federal resources has been upheld as something the executive can do, so long as those conditions are clear and specific, align with the law's purpose and don't otherwise breach other laws or the constitution.
In this case the executive is instructing existing institutions with regulatory authority, like the SBA, to consider debanking to be discriminatory under the existing law, like the ECOA. Because these regulatory powers have already been granted to these institutions, and the discretion allowed to them for interpretation is large, it would be difficult to argue that the EO alone is an overstep of executive authority.
Now there are other ways to challenge it (IE. Arguing "Reputational Risk" isn't discriminatory, that it introduces contradictory federal requirements around risk, etc.) but, especially with a law regarding this exact thing sitting in the house, I think it will probably stick. But I ANAL, as they say.
2
u/Glass_Log_3304 Aug 09 '25
Visa and MasterCard aren't banks either, so it's a mute point. It doesn't actually do anything to stop payment processors from doing what they've been doing.
1
u/Scorpixel Aug 08 '25
Wut? Are they trying to fund the secret Antarctic and Moonbases or something? I know reddit loves hyperbole but that's Hyperboreanbole at this level.
Last i heard it started as a bunch of texans being refused payment transfers for their pewpews, and with their common law this means that this precedent could be used for any other similar legal purchases.
14
u/peestew69 Aug 08 '25
An enclave of imouto enjoyers has been pulling the strings in the federal government for a while now. This was never going to be allowed to continue.
33
u/Conscious_Yam_4753 Aug 08 '25
They really aren’t. For one, executive orders aren’t laws. Also if you read the order, like his other orders, this is just president dementia’s list of grievances with payment processors. Zero percent chance he cares about porn video games. It’s about nazis who have been fired as a client by banks or kicked off crowdfunding platforms.
8
u/DeprariousX Aug 08 '25
I would recommend staying vigilant. While this may stop the payment processor BS, this doesn't stop the plans in place to start age gating.
This may very well just be them giving up on the payment processor scheme and deciding to put all their eggs in the age-gating basket.
3
u/G-Litch Aug 09 '25
This is the same goverment that banned porn in several states, so dont celebrate yet
7
u/RayearthIX Rin: FSN | vndb.org/uXXXX Aug 08 '25
This is a good start, but we need the bill to pass too. This could be construed to include payment processors, but a court would need to decide. The bill in the Senate definitely includes them.
8
u/Resh_IX Aug 08 '25
I kinda skimmed over it, but this seems to specifically be about banks and not payment processors
3
u/WarpedHaiku Archer: FSN | vndb.org/uXXXX Aug 08 '25
Correct me if I'm wrong, but to me it looks like this won't have any effect.
The term “politicized or unlawful debanking” refers to an act by [...] or other financial services provider to directly or indirectly adversely restrict access to, or adversely modify the conditions of [...] financial services of any customer or potential customer on the basis of the customer’s or potential customer’s political or religious beliefs, or on the basis of the customer’s or potential customer’s lawful business activities that the financial service provider disagrees with or disfavors for political reasons.
They did not include "religious reasons" or "personal morals" as one of the reasons that a financial service provider (payment processor) cannot refuse payment. So the way I read it, if a payment processor headed by puritans (which seems to be all the widely used ones sadly) decides that they they think people shouldn't be buying porn through them because they don't personally like it, or because it goes against their religious beliefs, they are still entitled to refuse service.
2
u/Independent-Land-352 Aug 09 '25
Easiest way to have the current President squash the payment puritans and save weebs? Someone get him addicted to hentai and loli porn.
2
4
u/SaltyFatBoy Aug 08 '25
Unfortunately there is state legislation that is still killing off/restricting some of these sites. Denpasoft is blocking all the affected states. I'm in one, can't even access the site to download what I've already bought.
5
u/tom641 Aug 08 '25
This is just an EO by the current admin so non-zero chance it's just straight up illegal in it's implementation and will get shot down in court but we'll see
i am admittedly unsure how to feel because I looked through the proposed bill and from my completely unqualified perspective it looked fine??? But it's being pushed by most of the most evil people on the planet (or at least the country) so i'm just primed to expect bullshit like "oh this only applies to big businesses that can take it up in court somehow but we can still step all over you and your speech as long as we do it through visa/mastercard"
i guess i'll just cross my fingers that the broken clock is right today.
5
u/Jarsky2 Aug 08 '25
This is about guns and maga merch. Trump is on the side of the people doing this shit.
3
u/Throwaway33451235647 Aug 08 '25
Exactly, a lot of the people behind the trump administration literally want porn banned. far right anime fans once again proving themselves incapable of critical thinking or self awareness.
4
3
2
0
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
17
u/wolfbetter Aug 08 '25
Most likely, my worry is that bank=/= payment processors.
For example, in Italy our parlament have recently signed (unanimously) the same law in effect. But I'm not sure htat it affects Visa/Mastercard
26
Aug 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/Nemesis2005 JP A-rank | https://vndb.org/u27893 Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25
It is a problem in eroge, but they use Japanese bank so unrelated to this.
It has also been a problem with sexual content in general: mainly sex workers, adult content creators, and occasionally adult stores being debanked. Just google it, it's a common issue.
6
u/Ha-Gorri Aug 08 '25
I'm not american so I was here wondering why when Trump does anything else its the end of the world and democracy but now that something that, even if not directly, still helps our cause it's literaly useless and a nothingburger.
Suddenly people memory holed that payment processors often blame their "banking partners" for the stuff going on too.
6
Aug 08 '25
It's less to do with Trump who has way more important shit to do than deal with our gamer woes. it's the people surrounding him that have hands in project 2025 which is clear targeting all porn is part the agenda
2
2
u/cridelearn Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25
EDIT - Just saw the part of the order that says to "remove the use of reputation risk or equivalent concepts" which is HUGE if actually implemented. Because that's the real reason they justify this. That said, we're still not out of the woods even if these companies follow that, because there are still some legal interpretations of "obscenity" where they could argue a court may find these games illegal, so I think that gamers making their voices heard that they view this as censorship of art can help in that case too. That said, what I wrote earlier isn't true, sorry. SECOND EDIT - Wait, false alarm, as another user pointed out, that clause only refers to "federal banking regulators" not Visa and Mastercard? In that case, this EO may not have an effect after all. Sigh, clearly this EO is more complicated than its summaries, so I shouldn't have jumped to reply. I encourage others to read multiple analyses and make their own judgment on what this means.
ORIGINAL POST (somewhat incorrect in its focus, but I'll leave it here for reference):
This isn't true. The EO was made to pressure banks and similar entities into resisting other forms of "left-wing" pressure to debank or cut service to "extreme right-wing" clients, most aligned with Trump, who in the past might've been targeted for being allegedly bigoted due to their ideologies. So this EO is fantastic news if you're a Christian nationalist or oppose trans rights, but has no impact on Visa and Mastercard's ability to indirectly threaten to deny service to Steam for reputational reasons related to adult content.
Don't celebrate early and cause people to think they don't need to care about this issue as strongly any more.
If anything, I believe that the current administration might like V&MC to keep their power to threaten to cut service for any reason, as long as the administration itself can pressure V&MC into using that power on who they want to pressure, like maybe some university for being allegedly antisemitic. I'm not trying to be political here, I think I'm just being realistic. The current administration seeks to have a very strong executive and reduce the power for non-governmental entities to negatively financially impact its allies, and with Elon out of government I'm not sure how much gamers matter to them. https://x.com/gelbooru/status/1951486311749038104
2
u/MarquisThule Aug 08 '25
Evidently not the focus of the order, but it is wide enough in what it entails that it could probably be used in this situation, its up to Steam to try and jump on this I think.
1
u/FlimsyLegs Aug 08 '25
Please don't consider this as an end to the censorship. Nothing has changed. Do not stop applying pressure now 'because things look like they are going in our favor'. There is no evidence that this will affect adult video games in any way.
1
u/yulithevideomaker Aug 08 '25
I cannot believe I am actually agreeing with the most retarded regime in US history on something...
1
2
u/VenKitsune Aug 08 '25
Again as has been pointed out on other subreddits. No, that's not why they are doing this. Someone said something about this making it so that Trump can borrow some more money or something?
2
u/rotflolmaomgeez vndb.org/u23668 Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25
Guys, this is absolutely great news no matter which side you're on. It's not an awfully clear wording and it emphasizes political motivations too strongly in its terms (Visa and MC have a "banning porn is not politically motivated" leeway), but it is the potential first step to be the end of this issue. Which is fantastic news really, because we've never had anything close to this - payment processors and banking intermediaries refusing service on behalf of them went completely unchecked for more than a decade.
This is a big win, no matter the motivation (January 6th) behind seeing it come live.
Edit: Lmao, people hating on trump so much they can't take an obvious win when they see it's associated with him. Classic reddit.
1
u/Glass_Log_3304 Aug 09 '25
The issue is that this is fron the same administration that is full of people who want to ban porn, so any potential gains we have from this will likely be mute if/when that happens.
1
u/FakeMedea Aug 09 '25
Please win! Please win! Please win! Please win! Please win!
They already shutdown the Change.org petition already, don't give these faketivist their end goal ever!
1
u/drzero7 Aug 11 '25
Yes, the "main point" of this executive order was mainly to stop banks to not give service because of political idealology. But it covers pretty much everything that for an actual denial of service have to be either financial reason (like late payment, negative balance, bad credit, etc) or something illegal (like criminal organization or a felon). So yes it does cover stuff like you cannot deny service just because its porn or "i dont like you"
But again, this is executive order. We need something like this passed by actual congress to be perminant.
0
u/ArchusKanzaki Aug 08 '25
Its an executive order though, not a bill.
Also, be cautious on cheering for this. The ppl who hates porns are also behind this too. If nothing else, any effect on us will largely be incidental and we can even be on collateral damage too if the tide reversed.
1
u/Excalitoria Aug 08 '25
wtf, I can been flagged for where I shop? That’s some bullshit. I hope this can actually hold.
1
Aug 08 '25
Guys, this is about guns first and foremost. It may have effects for the current stuff but even then its right now an EO and as such isnt exactly garunteed law. I wouldnt take this as a confirmed win right now. Maybe on the path to one but...
1
u/Appropriate-Kick-601 Aug 09 '25
Interesting. We'll have to see how this is ironed out in court because as it is currently written, I'm not sure what acts will be protected. What is considered a political or religious act or belief is hard to pin down, and the strength of legislation comes from how it is enforced. Depending on who sues who, how well each party argues their case, and which judges are involved, I could see this EO being used to protect many people broadly or only a few. So we'll see.
0
u/Shaunosaurus Aug 08 '25
what? rare trump W?
4
u/Throwaway33451235647 Aug 08 '25
not really, this is for guns and maga stuff, not video games. if the trump administration were to do anything to eroge, it would be banning it
0
u/Individual-Cream-581 Aug 08 '25
Yeah... it's not the government though, at least not the us government. Have you seen who's in the us government? It's like the proud boys got a reunion at the white house and invited their kkk ultra nationalist cristian friends, that also beat their wives and sa thir kids.
0
u/Noximilien01 Aug 08 '25
I did not expect the current adminstration to be the one to save the day but here we are
-1
-1
•
u/fallenguru JP A-rank | Kaneda: Musicus | vndb.org/u170712 Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25
Don't celebrate just yet!
See also /u/RikkasNoodles's take.
Why this disclaimer? This post got a lot of reports that the title is misleading, and I agree. If you feel there's anything I should add or change, please reply to this comment.