12h ago

Supreme Court to hear arguments over Mexican government's suit against U.S. gunmakers

www.cbsnews.com Supreme Court to hear arguments over Mexican government's suit against U.S. gunmakers

The Supreme Court is set to consider the Mexican government's effort to hold U.S. gun companies accountable for violence involving trafficked firearms.

Summary

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in a lawsuit brought by Mexico seeking to hold U.S. gun companies liable for firearm trafficking that fuels cartel violence.

Mexico argues that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) does not shield gunmakers who knowingly facilitate illegal sales.

Lower courts disagreed on whether the "predicate exception" applies, prompting the Supreme Court to step in.

If the ruling favors Mexico, it could open legal avenues for similar suits. Gunmakers contend Mexico's claims fail due to multiple intervening steps before guns reach cartels.

16 comments

There is no way the Supremely Corrupt Court let's countries start suing US gun manufacturers.
- I think they would if more CEOs get gunned down.
  
  Even then - I doubt it.
  But it's probably still worth testing that experiment... for science

Oh… so in this case Mexico waited a bit long. Remember Operation Fast and Furious? I know this more about the manufacturers but should the licensed dealers be liable too?

Supreme court: "Hmm, sounds like you need to increase YOUR border security!"

In the United States the sale of Firearms is regulated by the Federal Government and / or and individual State itself. All NEW firearm sales must go through an FFL. In many places that is also true for used firearms but even where it isn't its STILL one person selling a firearm to someone else.
To make it absolutely clear at no point in any firearms transaction is any normal person purchasing firearms directly from a firearms manufacturer.
In the case of entities, such as a Gun Store / FFL, who can purchase new firearms directly from a manufacturer there's still no direct sales happening and the sale of those firearms is controlled by Federal Law.
So HOW is it the fault of US Firearm Manufacturers when people purchase firearms and traffic them across the southern border?
- I would think that they could be liable in the same way pharmacists were for the opioid epidemic.
  If they can prove the manufacturers were supplying a 'suspicious' number of firearms to a couple of dealers like the pharmacists were supplying a suspicious number of pills to pill mill doctors.
  
  I would think that they could be liable in the same way pharmacists were for the opioid epidemic.
  In the opioid epidemic the Pharmacists got into trouble because they had relationships with the manufacturers, the Doctors, and the Patients. So in this instance the best fit for your analogy is the Firearms Dealers as they are the ones who have relationships with the Manufacturers, BATFE, and the buyers.
  If they can prove the manufacturers were supplying a ‘suspicious’ number of firearms to a couple of dealers...
  It doesn't work like that. The sale of firearms from the Manufacturer to the Wholesaler is regulated by the Federal Government because they set the rules. In many cases the Manufacturer doesn't even know what dealer is going to end up with how many firearms or of what type. Some of them certainly do but Interstate Arms nor Smith & Wesson are not special in that regard.

This is going to be a fair and unbiased ruling.

When has the SCOTUS ever ruled against the gun lobby?

16 comments