BOSTON — Attorney General Maura Healey led a coalition of 14 attorneys general in filing a brief with the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts arguing that a federal law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), does not shield gun manufacturers and dealers from consumer laws governing the marketing and sale of firearms.

“It is unacceptable for gun manufacturers and distributors to knowingly market their products in in a way that facilitates the illegal trafficking of weapons into the hands of dangerous individuals,” AG Healey said. “We urge the Court to recognize that gun dealers, manufacturers, and distributors may be held accountable under state laws for how they market and sell their products.”

The brief, filed Monday in Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. et al., supports the government of Mexico in a lawsuit brought against seven U.S.-based gun manufacturers, Smith & Wesson, Barrett Firearms, Beretta, Century Arms, Colt, Glock, and Ruger, as well as a Massachusetts-based gun distributor, Interstate Arms. Mexico’s complaint alleges the defendants design, market, distribute, and sell guns in a way they know appeals to drug cartels and violent gangs in Mexico. The coalition’s brief argues against the defendants’ contentions that, through PLCAA, Congress “erected an insurmountable barrier to traditional state law forms of accountability.”

highdesert wrote: Tue Jul 25, 2023 11:31 am This was argued before the 1st Circuit which is in Boston and if the 3 judge panel sides with Mexico, I expect this will end up at SCOTUS. Mexico has a corruption problem and they let themselves be overrun by drug cartels, but they want to be seen as a victim of US gun manufacturers. Hope the 3 judge panel finds for S&W and dismisses this law suit with prejudice.

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, opens new tab a lower-court judge's decision dismissing the case on the grounds that a U.S. law barred Mexico from suing Smith & Wesson Brands (SWBI.O), opens new tab, Sturm, Ruger & Co (RGR.N), opens new tab 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." He said that was because the law was only designed to protect lawful firearms-related commerce, yet Mexico had accused the companies of aiding and abetting illegal gun sales by facilitating the trafficking of firearms into the country. Mexican Foreign Minister Alicia Barcena called the ruling "great news" in a post on the social media platform X. The country's U.S. lawyer, Steve Shadowen, called it "an important step forward in holding the gun industry accountable."

Mexico says over 500,000 guns are trafficked annually from the U.S. into Mexico, of which more than 68% are made by the companies it sued, which also include Beretta USA, Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Colt's Manufacturing Co and Glock Inc. In its August 2021 complaint, Mexico estimated that 2.2% of the nearly 40 million guns made annually in the U.S. are smuggled into Mexico, including as many as 597,000 guns made by the defendants. Mexico said the smuggling has been a key factor in its ranking third worldwide in the number of gun-related deaths. It also claimed to suffer many other harms, including declining investment and economic activity and a need to spend more on law enforcement and public safety. The companies deny wrongdoing. Their lawyers say Mexico's lawsuit is devoid of allegations the gun manufacturers' gun sales themselves did anything that would create an exception to PLCAA's broad protections.

For the foregoing reasons, the motions of defendants Barrett Firearms Manufacturing,
Inc.; Beretta U.S.A. Corp.; Century International Arms, Inc.; Colt’s Manufacturing Company,
LLC; Glock, Inc.; and Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) are GRANTED.

So Ordered.
/s/ F. Dennis Saylor IV
F. Dennis Saylor IV

Dated: August 7, 2024 Chief Judge, United States District Court

A U.S. judge dismissed on Wednesday much of Mexico's $10 billion lawsuit seeking to hold U.S. gun manufacturers responsible for facilitating the trafficking of firearms to violent drug cartels across the U.S.-Mexico border. U.S. District Judge Dennis Saylor in Boston dismissed claims, opens new tab against six of the eight companies that Mexico sued in 2021, including Sturm, Ruger (RGR.N), opens new tab and Glock, calling their connection to Massachusetts, where the case was filed, "gossamer-thin at best."

Mexico's foreign ministry responded by saying that legal action against the six firms would continue and that it was considering presenting an appeal or resorting to other U.S. courts. "This decision does not affect the lawsuit against these two companies nor does it absolve the other six companies of responsibility," the ministry told Reuters. The two remaining defendants are Smith & Wesson Brands (SWBI.O), opens new tab, which in 2021 announced it was relocating to Tennessee from Massachusetts over gun regulations, and wholesaler Witmer Public Safety Group.

In his decision, Saylor said none of the six companies was incorporated in Massachusetts, and that Mexico did not show that any firearms sold in Massachusetts caused it harm. While Mexico argued that statistically it was likely that some firearms sold in Massachusetts were eventually illegally trafficked to Mexico, Saylor said the country lacked sufficient evidence to establish jurisdiction. Others companies dismissed from the case included Barrett Firearms Manufacturing; Colt's Manufacturing, a unit of Colt CZ Group (CZG.PR), opens new tab; Century International Arms, and Beretta.

Lawrence Keane, general counsel of industry trade group National Shooting Sports Foundation, welcomed Saylor's decision to reject Mexico's "obvious forum-shopping," and expressed optimism that the U.S. Supreme Court would toss the rest of the case. The companies in April asked the Supreme Court to review a federal appeals court decision that the case qualified for an exception to a law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that grants the firearms industry broad protection from lawsuits over misuse of their products.

CDFingers wrote: Fri Aug 09, 2024 9:46 am "I'm a vegetarian, and my kid is buying hamberders at a local stand. I want them banned."

CDF

The Supreme Court on Friday said it will consider a bid by U.S. gun-makers to end a lawsuit from the Mexican government seeking to hold them liable for violence committed by drug cartels. The case involves some of the nation's biggest and most well-known gun companies, including Smith & Wesson, Beretta and Glock. They are urging the Supreme Court to reverse a lower court ruling that allowed Mexico's lawsuit against them to proceed despite despite a 2005 law that broadly shields the firearms industry from liability. The case will be argued in the court's next term, which kicks off Monday. It is one of 13 new cases the justices added to the docket after meeting to consider a host of appeals earlier this week.

The court fight arose out of an August 2021 lawsuit that the Mexican government filed against seven U.S. gun manufacturers and one distributor that sought to hold them liable for the violence committed by drug cartels in the country. Mexico claimed gun dealers in the U.S. are the main source of guns used by the cartels, with as many as 597,000 of their firearms trafficked into Mexico every year. Nearly half of all guns recovered at Mexican crime scenes are made by the companies named in the suit, lawyers said. The suit alleged that the gun industry is "aiding and abetting" the cartels by engaging in certain business practices even as they know that the cartels have been able to smuggle their firearms across the southern border. Firearms makers in the U.S., the Mexican government claimed, engaged in this conduct to profit off the criminal market for their weapons.

Mexico specifically pointed to four different sets of policies that it said bolstered its claim that the gun industry "actively assisted and facilitated" terrorist groups at the U.S.-Mexico border for decades, including its decision to continue making and selling semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 and large-capacity magazines. The Mexican government also took issue with gun companies' marketing and manufacturing decisions, claiming they made their firearms easy to modify. Mexico asked for $10 billion in damages and a court order requiring the gun-makers to take "all necessary action to abate the current and future harm that their conduct is causing and would otherwise cause in the future in Mexico," among other steps. A federal district court tossed out Mexico's lawsuit, pointing to a 2005 law that bars such suits from being brought in U.S. courts. That law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, protects law-abiding gun companies from liability for the harm caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of their products. If a member of the firearms industry breaks the law, the liability shield may lift.

The law has been applied in a host of lawsuits brought by cities and American citizens who have tried to sue the gun industry over the misuse of their weapons. A federal appeals court revived the Mexican government's suit, claiming it qualified for an exception under the 2005 law. The court found that "by passing along guns knowing that the purchasers include unlawful buyers, and making design and marketing decisions targeted towards those exact individuals, the manufacturer is aiding and abetting illegal sales." The gun industry is asking the Supreme Court to reverse that decision, warning that it could open the door to a flood of lawsuits from other foreign and U.S. governmental entities seeking to hold the firearms industry accountable for the violence perpetrated by users of their weapons. While the case initially involved eight gun-industry entities, the district court granted a bid from six to toss out the suit on other grounds. That decision did not effect Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms.

"Mexico's multi-billion-dollar suit will hang over the American firearms industry for years, inflicting costly and intrusive discovery at the hands of a foreign sovereign that is trying to bully the industry into adopting a host of gun-control measures that have been repeatedly rejected by American voters," lawyers for the firearms manufacturers warned the Supreme Court in a filing. Lawyers for the Mexican government stressed that the case is far from over, as proceedings are continuing before the district court, including on efforts to toss out the case on other grounds. They accused the gun industry of providing firepower to cartels, which have killed thousands of Mexican civilians, and refusing to curb weapons sales to a subset of dealers despite urgings from the Justice Department to do so. The manufacturers "made distinct, repeated, and deliberate decisions to supply unlawful sellers and took affirmative steps necessary for the illegal gun sales that armed the cartels," the Mexican government argued in a Supreme Court filing.