Rob Bonta Gun Control California
California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined 17 other state AGs to side with Mexico over American businesses.

In a simply nonsensical turn of events, attorney generals from 18 Democrat-run states have joined together to file a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Mexico’s lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers and firearms retailers.

Led by rabidly anti-gun and now anti-American California Attorney General Rob Bonta, the AGs came down on the wrong side of the issue, choosing to side with Mexico’s corrupt government rather than Americans working in a highly regulated industry. As usual, the AGs blame violent crime on guns, not criminals—or in this case, bloody cartel members. It is a move that signals they are willing to support the corrupt Mexican government and in so doing, reveal the level of their own corrupt activities that border on treason.

“It is our duty to ensure that companies are held accountable when they violate the law—manufacturers and distributors of firearms who threaten the safety of our communities are no exception,” Bonta said in a press release detailing the action. “PLCAA does not give gun manufacturers and distributors a free pass to create and distribute weapons they know are being trafficked and used to terrorize communities, in both Mexico and the United States.” Meanwhile, sneaking into the country, dealing drugs and trafficking firearms and humans are all illegal and currently going largely unpunished by Bonta and many other Democratic attorneys general.

This latest move by anti-gun AGs is nothing less than traitorous and un-American, siding with a foreign government over our country’s business interests simply to further their own political agenda. Gun owners living in states whose AG chose Mexico over America should start working now to remove those officials in the next election or even sooner depending on the process required to initiate a recall.

At the heart of the legal battle are accusations by Mexico that U.S. firearm companies are complicit in fueling gun violence across the border, claims that are patently laughable given the well-documented savagery of cartels with and without guns and widespread weakness and corruption at every level of the Mexican government. The issue has made it all the way to the Supreme Court in the case ongoing case Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc, et al. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, and numerous pro-gun groups have filed briefs with the court asking that the lawsuit be killed.

The Democrat AGs, however, are arguing just the opposite.

“When Congress enacted PLCAA, it deliberately struck a balance: it sought to ensure that law-abiding manufacturers and sellers of guns would not face liability for harms inflicted solely as a result of third parties’ unlawful conduct, but simultaneously preserved certain common-law and statutory remedies for harms brought about by gun industry members’ own misconduct,” the brief stated. “This Court should reject Petitioners’ invitation to interpret PLCAA’s predicate exception to confer upon them absolute immunity as inconsistent with settled principles regarding preemption, with traditional principles of tort law, and with PLCAA’s text and legislative history.”

I’m sure TTAG readers would love to know if their state attorney general played any part in this despicable action, so we’re publishing the complete list of AGs signing onto the brief.

Other traitorous AGs in addition to Bonta include:

  • Delaware AG Kathy Jennings

  • District of Columbia AG Brian Schwalb
  • 
Hawaii AG Anne Lopez
  • 
Illinois AG Kwame Raoul
  • 
Maryland AG Anthony Brown

  • Michigan AG Dana Nissel

  • Minnesota AG Keith Ellison
  • 
Nevada AG Aaron Ford 

  • New Jersey AG Matt Platkin
  • 
New Mexico AG Raúl Torrez

  • New York AG Letitia James

  • Oregon AG Dan Rayfield

  • Pennsylvania AG Dave Sunday

  • Rhode Island AG Peter Neronha
  • 
Vermont AG Charity Clark.

Voters in these states are urged to contact their state AG office and other state leaders to condemn this blatantly treasonous action against legal businesses and citizens of the United States.

40 COMMENTS

  1. Acquisition of Mexico would reduce our southern border by 75% and make ridding the planet of the drug cartels much easier. Problem solved.

    • Do you have any idea how pissy the automotive industry would be at having to pay minimum wage for most of their parts?

      • Don’t care. If they won’t hire Americans, screw em. I’d be just as happy with Trump shutting the boarder so their factories there can’t ship to the American market.

        Sometimes the cost cutting gamble has to blow up to discourage others from trying it at the expense of their neighbors.

        • Can’t argue with that was just curious where that comment would head as I would have no interest in annexing Mexico under any circumstances and that would be a major sector that could be blowback for the current administration.

    • Are you mad? How many states would you carve out of Mexico? Remember the Democrats would get two US Senators for each. How many red state Congressional seats would you be willing to give up to these new states?

      • Who said give Mexico state status. Make it a commonwealth just like Puerto Rico. Which entails only having a non voting member of the House called a commissioner and no representation in the Senate.

  2. It does make you wonder how much “consideration” these AGs are receiving from Mexican interests.

    The silver or the lead the saying goes.

  3. Unsurprising list. That they are lead by Bonta was entirely predictable. At least they are consistent, making it easier to oppose them. Under the theory of the case, the manufacturer’s knowledge that their products are used illegally would mean that evidence of any gun crime would be a basis for damages and the end of the firearms industry. The same theory could be used against car manufacturers since those guys have to know that cars are driven by drunks and used as get-away vehicle. Knives, as in England, would be next I suppose. On the other hand, knowledge is only one of the elements necessary to establish tort liability; under California law anyway, the court has to balance a number of factors in determining whether a duty was owed, including forseeability, moral blame, policy of preventing future harm, burden on the defendant, and the presence or absence if insurance. I assume that the State AGs did not consider duty analysis at all in their briefs, or they simply conclude that guns are bad and therefore it would be a good thing to eliminate them. You know, the usual.

    • Mark N.,

      A state could use the same legal theory against shoe manufacturers since every violent criminal uses footwear (especially in cold winter months) to facilitate their violent crimes.

      Needless to say this type of lawsuit is garbage.

  4. I will not be contacting my state politicians: they don’t care what I have to say since I am NOT a big donor to their campaign or their political party.

    • I will not be contacting my state politicians: they don’t care what I have to say since they are hard core Democrats and gun banners who’ve never seen a restriction on ownership of guns they did not approve of. I won’t waste my breath.

    • I will not be contacting my state politicians (my AG is on that list).
      If I did contact them I could probably visits from my local far left sheriff
      or state police with some kind of made up excuse for the ‘visit’.
      We have a ‘red flag’ law here and the politicians detest gun owners.
      BTW, a member of the State House or Senate can get a CCW for the asking,
      the rest of us have to go through at least 16 hours of training.

  5. National divorce.
    So we are suppose to do nothing when states tell other states your civil rights don’t exist. This is the kind of stuff that would eventually lead to the civil war.

    What if they apply this thinking to not accepting homosexual marriage? We don’t accept plural marriage.
    Now I’ve got your attention.

  6. Seems to me the Obama administration, through Operation Fast and Furious, had more to do with weapons going to Mexico than the gun manufacturers. I just cannot believe, given the scrutiny the manufacturers are under, that they would knowingly sell to shady distributors.

  7. Isn’t this just copycatting? Hell, New York claims that without New Jersey supplying guns to criminals, they’d be the safest resort destination in the whole world.
    From what I’ve read, 30 to 40 percent of Mexico’s military weapons, imported from many different countries, go “missing” from armories – maybe we should halt all military sales to our “friends” in Mexico.

      • Nothing to apologize about, we largely fit that second description before Covid but between that bail reform and the illegals we are basically held together by Italian restaurants (totally not mob connected) and stubborn rednecks who haven’t moved yet. NYC also blamed PA and GA but people can get pretty much anything in via Amtrak especially in the Delaware station.

    • If we had none of their guns Chicago, and Illinois, would be sin-free. Illinois says the same thing about Indiana – it’s all their fault.

  8. The list should be rounded up and deported to the country they support. Sickos blaming firearm manufacturers for crime is as ridiculous as blaming GM/Ford/Chrysler for drunk drivers. Best thing about it is watching democRats lose.

  9. That list is a list of people who should be thrown out of office as soon as possible. Sadly, most of them will probably only be elected to a higher office. Government where “failing up” is the norm.

    • My AG potentially has some investigations headed her way for…….well reasons. Otherwise yeah minimal consequences.

  10. Sounds like Mexico, Canada, and Greenland…. could all use some freedom. Insurgency you say? I got one word. Crucifixion.

    • Yeah 3rd year for this one but may make it out of committee for a vote this session. Not as much going on with the anti gun stuff just yet.compared to the last 5.

  11. Trump Ends (Biden-Harris) Federal Involvement In Child ‘Chemical And Surgical Mutilation’.

    h ttps://thefederalist.com/2025/01/28/trump-ends-federal-involvement-in-child-chemical-and-surgical-mutilation/

  12. FOIA Request Issued on Merrick Garland’s ‘Tommy Gun’.

    h ttps://www.ammoland.com/2025/01/foia-request-issued-on-merrick-garlands-tommy-gun/

  13. Sixth Circuit Revives Liability Lawsuit Against Sig Sauer.

    “A Kentucky man who claims his holstered pistol fired and struck him can once again sue the gunmaker who produced the weapon, a federal appeals court has ruled.

    On Monday, a divided panel for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court erred when it dismissed plaintiff Timothy Davis’s product liability claims against Sig Sauer. Specifically, the panel found that the lower court’s decision to disallow Davis’s use of expert witnesses was too sweeping and thus, improperly undermined his ability to proceed with a case against the firearm’s lack of specific external safety mechanisms.

    Davis’s case arose after he was shot in the leg when his P320 accidentally fired as he was getting out of his truck in January 2021. He testified that the firearm was fully holstered during the incident and that he never intentionally pulled the trigger. However, law enforcement responding to the scene at the time gave a conflicting report. They alleged Davis admitted to officers that he was actively ‘attempting to holster his weapon on his side when the gun accidentally discharged,’ according to the opinion.

    Nevertheless, Davis sued Sig Sauer the following year, arguing that his P320 model’s lack of any external safety mechanisms, such as a manual thumb or grip safety, constituted a product defect that led to the discharge. His legal team hired two expert witnesses, a gunsmith and a “risk-analysis expert,” who offered testimony claiming that the P320’s lack of manual safety devices increased the likelihood of Davis’s accident. The district court ultimately ruled to exclude their testimony on the grounds that it was ‘speculati[ve]’ and could not actually address what caused Davis’s trigger to engage. It also tossed his suit.

    On appeal, Judge Moore determined that latter step was one too far.

    ‘Although we agree with the district court that the experts do not have a factual basis on which to opine on causation of the incident, their testimonies are admissible for other purposes,’ Moore, a Bill Clinton appointee, wrote. ‘Both experts provide reliable and helpful testimony in explaining the intricacies of the P320 and reasonable alternative designs that Sig Sauer could have implemented to make the P320 less susceptible to inadvertent actuation.’

    …”

    h ttps://thereload.com/sixth-circuit-revives-liability-lawsuit-against-sig-sauer/

  14. So, the arms produced in the USA and sold to the Mexican Military…….none of those are trafficked to the cartels! Right? Right????

  15. This article mistakenly identifies Pennsylvania AG Dave Sunday as one of the responsible parties for the amicus brief. The brief was filed on January 17, 2025, four days before AG Sunday took office. The previous Democrat AG, Michelle Henry, is responsible for the amicus brief. Henry was appointed by anti-gun PA Governor Josh Shapiro.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here