WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on Tuesday in a groundbreaking $10 billion lawsuit brought by Mexico against top firearm manufacturers in the United States. Mexico alleges that the business practices of these gun makers have contributed to the violence perpetuated by cartel gun activity. The manufacturers, however, deny these accusations and have sought the Supreme Court’s intervention to reverse a previous ruling that permitted the lawsuit to proceed, despite U.S. laws that generally protect gun makers from such legal actions.
The outcome of this case could have broader implications, potentially impacting a legal avenue that enabled families of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting victims to secure a significant $73 million settlement from gun manufacturer Remington. Here’s what you need to know about this pivotal case:
Why did Mexico sue U.S. gun companies?
Mexico enforces stringent gun regulations and only has one authorized store where individuals can legally purchase firearms. Despite this, a large number of guns are illicitly smuggled into the country by powerful drug cartels. The Mexican government asserts that 70% of these weapons originate from the United States. The lawsuit alleges that these companies were aware their firearms were being sold to traffickers who illegally transported them into Mexico with the intention of capitalizing on this market. The defendants include well-known manufacturers such as Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Colt, and Glock. While the lawsuit is still in its early stages, Mexico would need to substantiate its claims if the court were to rule in its favor.
What do the gun companies argue?
The gun manufacturers contend that there is no concrete evidence to suggest that the industry facilitates gun trafficking, and they dispute Mexico’s statistics regarding the origin of firearms entering the country. They argue that it is the responsibility of the Mexican government, not U.S. gun makers, to enforce laws and combat criminal activities. Under a law enacted two decades ago, the industry is largely shielded from civil lawsuits stemming from crimes committed with firearms, though Mexico has contended that this protection does not extend to crimes committed outside U.S. borders. The manufacturers are urging the Supreme Court to overturn a decision by the appeals court that allowed the case to proceed.
What comes next?
The exception in the law has been invoked in other legal proceedings. In the case of the victims of the tragic 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting, they argued that this exception applied to their lawsuit because the gun manufacturer had purportedly violated state laws in the marketing of the AR-15 rifle used in the shooting that claimed the lives of 20 young children and six educators. While the Supreme Court declined to hear that particular case, following the $73 million settlement, the families expressed hope that it would lead to enhanced safety measures and greater accountability. Depending on the Supreme Court’s decision, the outcome could potentially restrict or eliminate this legal recourse.
___
Stay updated on the latest developments from the U.S. Supreme Court by following the AP’s
