In a landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by the Mexican government against seven U.S.-based gun manufacturers. The suit, filed in 2021, accused the companies of contributing to the trafficking of firearms into Mexico, which allegedly exacerbated the nation's crime rates. The case, argued on Thursday, was settled in favor of the gun manufacturers, upheld by the High Court based on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) of 2005.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that Mexico's allegations were insufficient to override the PLCAA's protections. The law specifically grants immunity to gun companies from civil lawsuits where they might be held responsible for crimes perpetrated with their products. Mexico's contention was that the manufacturers had "knowingly violated" regulations related to the sale or marketing of firearms, effectively aiding and abetting criminal activities by doing very little to prevent their weapons from falling into the hands of drug cartels.
However, Justice Kagan underscored that the Mexican government had not met the necessary legal criteria to establish an aiding-and-abetting claim. She clarified that mere knowledge of the potential misuse of products by criminals does not equate to aiding and abetting those crimes. Even if companies could take further measures to reduce the illicit use of their products, this alone would not constitute culpable participation in wrongdoing under the terms of the PLCAA.
The Supreme Court's decision was met with disappointment from the Mexican government. Pablo Arrocha Olabuenaga, the legal adviser for Mexico's Foreign Ministry, expressed the nation's resolve to continue protecting its citizens and combating the illegal gun trade. Meanwhile, Jonathan Lowey, president of Global Action on Gun Violence, lamented the ruling and vowed to persist in efforts with the Mexican government to halt the flow of firearms used in crimes.
The case, officially known as Smith and Wesson v. Mexico, garnered attention with Justice Kagan, traditionally viewed as liberal, delivering the opinion without any dissents, indicating a unanimous decision by the court. The ruling has sparked further discussions about the PLCAA and its role in shielding the gun industry from legal repercussions.
