Vern Evans
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear the case concerning Mexico suing some U.S. gun manufacturers for allegedly putting guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
Mexico claims the companies deliberately chose to “profit off the criminal market for their products” and caused a flood of guns to fall into the hands of Mexican cartels. And the Mexican government wants the companies to pay billions of dollars in damages.
In August, a Federal Judge in Boston dismissed several companies from the lawsuit, including Sturm, Ruger and Company, Glock, Barrett Firearms, Colt’s Manufacturing, Century International Arms and Beretta. Companies still involved in the lawsuit include gunmaker Smith & Wesson and wholesaler Whitmer Public Safety Group.
Of course, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) precludes frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry for damages caused by the criminal and unlawful acts of remote third parties. Consequently, a U.S. District court dismissed the case, finding the claims were barred by the PLCAA.
However, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals revived the case on Mexico’s appeal, holding that Mexico’s claims alleging that the defendants know their regular business practices contribute to illegal firearm trafficking fit within a narrow exception to the PLCAA.
Response from the firearms industry to the Supreme Court agreeing to hear the case was unanimously positive. Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), called Friday’s announcement “welcomed news.”
“Today’s announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court that they are granting Smith & Wesson’s petition to hear Mexico’s frivolous $10 billion lawsuit against lawful American firearm manufacturers is welcomed news to the entire firearm industry,” Keane said in an NSSF news item. “Mexico’s lawsuit seeks to blame lawful American firearm businesses for violence in Mexico perpetrated by Mexican narco-terrorist drug cartels and impacting innocent Mexican lives. It is not the fault of American firearm businesses that follow strict laws and regulations to lawfully manufacture and sell legal products.”
As Keane further pointed out, such lawsuits are precisely the reason the PLCAA was passed in the first place.
“This case represents exactly why Congress passed, and President George W. Bush enacted, the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA),” he said. “The case was rightly dismissed by a federal judge before the First Circuit Court of Appeals’ erroneous ruling earlier this year that reversed the district court order and reinstated the case.”
As Keane pointed out, companies following the law shouldn’t be persecuted by a foreign government for doing so.
“Lawful American firearm manufacturers follow American laws to make and sell lawful and Constitutionally-protected products,” he added. “The Mexican government should instead focus on bringing Mexican criminals to justice in Mexican courtrooms.”
In a brief submitted to the Supreme Court in May by the National Rifle Association, the organization urged the court to take up the case, saying Mexico had extinguished its right to bear arms and now seeks to do the same in America.
“To that end, Mexico aims to destroy the American firearms industry financially,” the NRA brief stated. “Mexico seeks billions of dollars in damages and the imposition of extensive gun controls in America while relying on shoddy data and false allegations to exaggerate the impact of Petitioners’ firearms on Mexican homicides.”
Read the full article here