It has to be one of the most clearly biased rulings by a court in recent history. Reuters last week reported the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based out of Boston, overturned a lower court’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit by Mexico against U.S. firearms manufacturers. The lower court had dismissed the lawuit because it said it violates the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). Mexico is seeking $10 billion in damages from U.S. gun companies who they blame for all the murders and mayhem created by cartels in that country, rather than blame the cartels themselves.

The news, which actually hit last week as SHOT Show was getting underway in Las Vegas, notes that among the companies included in the suit are Smith & Wesson, Ruger and others.

Reuters reports:

A U.S. appeals court on Monday revived a $10 billion lawsuit by Mexico seeking to hold American gun manufacturers responsible for facilitating the trafficking of weapons to drug cartels across the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower-court judge’s decision dismissing the case on the grounds that a U.S. law barred Mexico from suing Smith & Wesson Brands, Sturm, Ruger & Co and others.

That law, the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), provides the firearms industry broad protection from lawsuits over their products’ misuse.

Mexico’s lawyers argued the law only bars lawsuits over injuries that occur in the U.S. and does not shield the seven manufacturers and one distributor it sued from liability over the trafficking of guns to Mexican criminals.

U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta, writing for the three-judge panel, said that while the law can be applied to lawsuits by foreign governments, Mexico’s lawsuit “plausibly alleges a type of claim that is statutorily exempt from the PLCAA’s general prohibition.”

That is because in the lawsuit, Mexico has accused American gun companies of actually facilitating illegal trafficking of firearms into the country themselves. It will be interesting to see what evidence they have of that taking place since gun sales in that country are so tightly restricted yet so ineptly enforced.

It will also be interesting to see how they will prove that given the mayhem generated from their own country including rampant smuggling of humans and drugs. But then, don’t think for a minute that this lawsuit is about actually solving a homegrown problem for Mexican officials. It is clear it is little more than an opportunity to exploit soft, liberal immigration policies and law in the United States at a time of weak leadership in the White House in order to grab money from U.S. companies and filter it into their own coffers.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

49 COMMENTS

  1. Just wondering, how does such a highly regulated industry “facilitate illegal trafficking” of firearms to another country?

    Surely such actions would be from external 3rd parties?

    The paperwork and government agency interference for any firearms related export is mindboggling.

    • Easy they produced the M16A1’s that the US gov sold/gifted to them and various other South and Central American nations who in turn sold….erm had stolen from them by various criminal gangs. See also H&K for the Germans amongst others. Because obviously the various firearm companies sell select fire weapons in great quantities to it’s citizens who smuggle them in greater quantities than actual Mexican gangs or the US government.

    • Mexico should actually be suing the U.S. government for facilitating the smuggling of weapons into Mexico. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the U.S. government engaged in criminal conspiracy and actions with regards to the smuggling of weapons into Mexico. If I was a lawyer for the firearms industry, that’s the first thing I’d point to as evidence of my clients’ innocence.

  2. It is just a democrats way of bankrupting an American company through frivolous lawsuits. They broke the NRA (with La Pierre’s help of course with his 250k worth of suits)

  3. Bearing in mind that ~30% of all the weapons imported by the government of Mexico ends up in the hands of cartels, Mexico needs to look closer to home to assign blame for their problems.

    Nice that an idiot activist judge has decided to take Mexico’s side here, huh? Let’s hope the case works it’s way to the Supreme Court before any progressive president can pack the court with more idiot activists.

    • I wonder how the “Fast and Furious” debacle from our Guv a few years back will play into the arguments in this case?

    • Did anyone visit the source article from Reuters (circa 2022)? There’s a lovely photo of 2 AR pattern rifles with this caption:

      “A Bushmaster semi-automatic assault rifle (top) and a Smith & Wesson semi-automatic rifle are turned in during a gun buyback event at the New Haven Police Academy in New Haven, Connecticut, December 22, 2012. REUTERS/ Michelle McLoughlin/File Photo”

      ‘…turned in during a gun buyback event…in New Haven, Connecticut…”

      The evil horrible black thingy eye-candy for the article has nothing to do with Mexico. Or smuggling. Or any criminal behavior. They were turned in voluntarily…in 2012.

      The truth? You can’t handle the…oh wait…you probably could. But we won’t give it to you.

  4. I still think that families of fentanyl poisoning should be suing the ‘nation’ of Mexico for their losses. I think about $30 million each sounds about right.

    • it should be asked if they want to go down this road considering the level of corruption in their government.

      far as I am concerned no arms maker should sell the Mexican Government a gun or single round of ammo again.

      Also, how much Aguilla do you guys think is used in drive bys etc.

      • Victor Bout is back in business thanks to that idiot basketball player.

        Although Vladimir Putin is probably Victor’s biggest customer and patron at this time.

    • Also, the victims of crime committed by any illegal who passed into the U.S. from Mexico should be entitled to sue for damages, paid directly from the Mexican government. I don’t know how our own government is any different than the cartels at this point. They are active participants in a scheme to enrich human traffickers at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer.

    • *could be. All matters who makes the final call. With that said yeah looks promising if expensive to get there.

  6. So when do we sue Mexico for the drugs and gangsters?

    When some Iranian “revolutionary” that waltzed over the border causes damage we’ll sue Mexico for facilitating that too, right?

  7. If Mexico seriously thinks arms being trafficked across the border is a problem, then shouldn’t they be filing suit against the federal government and its open border policies? Better yet, wouldn’t they build some sort of border wall on their side of the border to keep all these guns out of Mexico?

    The gun companies aren’t the ones trafficking anything into Mexico. The gun companies should file suite against the Mexican government for all the fentanyl being trafficked into the US.

  8. All the money these companies will spend to defend themselves. Lawfare 101 used by the socialistas, incarcerate ones opponents or bankrupt them or both. “By any means necessary” for whom is this quote attributed to, thinking it was from the 08-16 administration. Another quote from that period; “Don’t let a crisis go to waist”.

  9. If you haven’t noticed fraudulent lawsuits are en vogue. What happens when Gun Control is viewed by history illiterates as something good instead of the pure evil History confirms it to be.

  11. U.S. gun companies who they blame for all the murders and mayhem created by cartels in that country, rather than blame the cartels themselves.

    They COULD blame the corrupt cops and govt officials that allow the cartels to operate… Nahhhh, too simple… Funny thing, almost EVERY video I’ve seen of Cartel shootouts everyone had AKs, any US manufactured firearms in use in Mexico are either stolen or sold to them by Mexican cops and military (or Obama and Holder)… Be pretty hard to lay all that on US manufacturers, SCOTUS will probably uphold the lower court… I would think they would need to be more specific than just US gun manufacturers… Disclaimer: Not a lawyer and it’s been a long time since I spent a night in a Holiday Inn Express but common-sense rules (I think)…

  12. Permitted calibers and types: Private citizens are only permitted to own certain types and calibers of guns… Cartels have military grade stuff NOT sold by either of the only two gun dealers in the country…

    .22 caliber pistols, revolvers, and rifles
    .38 caliber for competition shooting
    Shotguns no greater than 12 gauge and with no less than a 25 inch barrel
    Many rifles are permitted; however, the following are specifically prohibited: .30, .223, 7 & 7.62 mm

    Non-explosive arms like air rifles may be imported without any special permits; as may accessories for air rifles (e.g. pellets). However, gas-propelled rifles and pistols (and their constituent parts and accessories), any firearm, and all equipment related to firearms—ammunition (regardless of caliber), sights, constituent parts or accessories, etc.—all require an import permit. Guess US gun manufacturers must be smuggling those full auto AKs and Glocks in to the cartels…

    • I take it ‘gas powered’ rules would apply to PCP rifles then? (Even though they are technically ‘air rifles’.)

      Just curious, as one of the AirForce Texans in .457 has over 600 ft/lbs muzzle energy..

  13. Well, from another point of view, part of my reaction to this was “GREAT!!!! When do we indict Eric “Wingman” Holder and Barry Soetoro???”. I mean, seriously, if you have a problem with manufacturers ‘trafficking arms’ (by making US GOVT APPROVED sales to foreign govts/LEOs), then shouldn’t Uncle Sugar step up and pay???

    This is idiocy. Ford does not have to pay the victim if a drunk/drugged-up teenager drives his Mustang GT the wrong way down a one-way street and kills a soccer mom and her two point two perfect kids, so . . . why is S&W or Ruger liable of some Mexican cartel scumbag offs half his village???

    ‘Splain that one to me, Lucy.

    The person who actually committed the crime is the one responsible. Sure, more could (and should) be done to provide diagnosis, help, and intervention (NOT those idiot, unconstitutional “Red Flag” laws!!) to help people who have real, serious mental illnesses. Making the MANUFACTURER liable when a nutbag or a coked-up drug minion kills people because . . . the gun worked exactly as anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size knew it would???

    Yes, guns can kill things/people. They can also protect things/people. I have a nice set of tools that I have collected over the years, and at least 2/3 of them I could use to kill someone. Better tell Black&Decker, Milwaukee, and the various manufacturers of “Craftsman” tools to gear up their lawyers.

    This sh*t is so dumb, I wouldn’t expect it from MajorLiar (dacian the demented is a coin toss).

    • Better tell Black&Decker, Milwaukee, and the various manufacturers of “Craftsman” tools to gear up their lawyers.

      My favorite is my old McCulloch Chainsaw… “Say hello to MY little friend…

      • If you can get ol’ yeller started…
        The big one we had was notoriously cranky, but once you got it running, it was one heck of a tree cutting machine.

      • MAXX,

        I just rely on my trusty chain saw bayonet.

        The anti-gun people are just objectively stupid (c.f., MajorLiar and dacian the demented, as simple examples (and I meant “simple” exactly the way you think i did!)).

  14. I never thought I’d see the day when The Lamp channelled Ricky Ricardo.

    And right on the money, too.

    By golly, I AM IMPRESSED!

  17. Well I hope the Mexican government wins and I hope the American gunm companies say fck u on the payment and we all go to War and then Mexican Avocado’s will be labeled Product of U.S.A.
    FJB

    • That’s not a bad idea. We should just make all the bad places in the world into U.S. States. Then the people there won’t be illegal anymore and can just stay where they are. Just like New Mexico was bad when it was just a place in Northern Mexico. Now, it’s the land of enchantment. Problem solved.

  18. U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta, writing for the three-judge panel, said that while the law can be applied to lawsuits by foreign governments, Mexico’s lawsuit “plausibly alleges a type of claim that is statutorily exempt from the PLCAA’s general prohibition.””

    Text of PLCAA:

    (5)Businesses in the United States that are engaged in interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design, manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to the public of firearms or ammunition products that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are not, and should not, be liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.

    (6)The possibility of imposing liability on an entire industry for harm that is solely caused by others is an abuse of the legal system, erodes public confidence in our Nation’s laws, threatens the diminution of a basic constitutional right and civil liberty, invites the disassembly and destabilization of other industries and economic sectors lawfully competing in the free enterprise system of the United States, and constitutes an unreasonable burden on interstate and foreign commerce of the United States. …

    (8)The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, private interest groups and others attempt to use the judicial branch to circumvent the Legislative branch of government to regulate interstate and foreign commerce through judgments and judicial decrees thereby threatening the Separation of Powers doctrine and weakening and undermining important principles of federalism, State sovereignty and comity between the sister States.

    (a)In general
    A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court.

  20. I bet that piece of shit Biden administration is behind this. They can’t get the firearms industry so maybe some other country can, sealed with a kiss from senile Joe.

  21. why can’t we sue Mxico for contributing to climate change in the US by way of it’s use of and creating fossil fuels given the stupid ass arguments made in Boston?

    It is pathetic that the now so socialistic and progressive states leading to the destruction of our Country are now so incredibly set on its destruction in very and any way possible. It is unbelievable to see these now atheistic courts and populations denying the American values and basis for our creation. This is going to get very ugly as these people continue to push for the destruction of everything we knew as making America great being tread asunder if these progressives cannot have absolute power. If they can’t have no one will. They will create an environment to burn it all down!!!

  23. (Unrelated) Paul Harrell

    Does anyone watch Paul Harrell? He’s a firearms instructor on YouTube. There’s also an account on Rumble, but it doesn’t have all of his videos. He said he’s pretty much done making videos because of deteriorating health (cancer). As of a couple days ago, he had about 840k subscribers. He now has 999k. He would have eventually broke 1 million anyway on merit alone. But I think it’s cool that people are showing their love and admiration for him.

    • Thanks for passing along the update Dude. I have been a subscriber of his for a long time. He may not be as flashy as some of the other “GunTubers” but he certainly presents information that is good to know and I am glad he dedicated his life to educating us.

  24. Mexico has the same problem U.S. States have when it comes to the trafficking of second hand guns. This comes about because once the original owner of the weapon decides to sell it the weapon often gets resold many times which lets the end seller traffic it to U.S. States with tough gun laws or traffic it to Mexico. The end result is murder and rivers of blood on both Mexico’s streets and U.S. Streets. Of course all this is pure insanity except to the Far Right sick paranoids that cannot reason sanely or logically.

    There can be no sane argument against Universal Background Checks, none what so ever. This law has been highly successful in both Europe and the Far East. That is Historical fact even the disingenuous and abject liars of the Far Right cannot refute.

  25. 2nd attempt to post

    Mexico has the same problem U.S. States have when it comes to the trafficking of second hand guns. This comes about because once the original owner of the weapon decides to sell it the weapon often gets resold many times which lets the end seller traffic it to U.S. States with tough gun laws or traffic it to Mexico. The end result is murder and rivers of blood on both Mexico’s streets and U.S. Streets. Of course all this is pure insanity except to the Far Right sick paranoids that cannot reason sanely or logically.

    There can be no sane argument against Universal Background Checks, none what so ever. This law has been highly successful in both Europe and the Far East. That is Historical fact even the disingenuous and abject liars of the Far Right cannot refute.

  26. Do is this an admittance thatthe COURTS of the USA are POLITICALLY BIASED and not independent as they are in the UK?? Because biasif it exists in the Courts works both ways according to Local Political Pursuasion. If this is really so then the USA is lost because above all things DEMOCRACY depends on an UNBIASED and INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY. It is NOT effected by either POPULAR OPINION or POLITICAL persuasions.

    • It is a condemnation of the American jurisprudence system that we have allowed it to deteriorate to this point. I really don’t care what you think of the UK court system’s supposed “independence.”

      Is the US “lost?” Probably. Is this a good thing for the UK? No — you’re either next, or you will precede us in failure.

      (Goddamn it, I hate to agree with Al.)

Comments are closed.