The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Mexico's lawsuit against firearms manufacturers for cartel violence was not valid, as the case did not adequately allege the defendants' involvement in illegal gun sales. The decision underscores the stringent limitations posed by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, making it even more difficult for victims of gun violence to seek accountability from the gun industry, particularly with new interpretations introduced by Justices Thomas and Jackson. This ruling expands the gun industry’s legal protections, suggesting a surge in impunity in gun-related harm cases.
Having taken the case at an unusually early stage in the litigation, and so working from an undeveloped factual record, all nine justices agreed that Mexico's current complaint does not even satisfactorily allege that the defendants have aided and abetted U.S. dealers who illegally sell guns to traffickers who then get them to the cartels in Mexico.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson each wrote separate concurrences in which they wade into the substantive law of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, offering unprecedented interpretations that would make it harder for victims of gun violence to try to hold firearms-makers and sellers responsible for their part in the harms they cause.
Collection
[
|
...
]