Supreme Court: US Gun Makers Not Liable for Cartel Violence
Mexico originally filed the suit in 2021, arguing that U.S. gun companies were responsible for the weapons that fueled cartel violence. Mexico received support in its lawsuit from American gun control advocacy groups such as Everytown and March for our Lives Action Fund.
The Supreme Court ruling, written by Justice Elena Kagan, found that the manufacturers alleged failure to exercise "reasonable care" does not meet the standard necessary to be found liable for "aiding and abetting" the sale of illegal firearms in Mexico.
Mexico had asked the court for $10 billion in damages and additional court-imposed injunctive relief in the form of restrictions on manufacturers. According to a lawyer who spoke to RCP, siding with Mexico on the injunctive relief "would have likely severely prohibited the distribution of the manufacturers products" within the United States.
A federal district court judge initially ruled that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protected the gun manufacturers from the suit. In 2024, the First Circuit Court of Appeals revitalized the lawsuit. In response, gun manufacturer Smith & Wesson brought the case to the Supreme Court.
The PLCAA, signed into law in 2005 by President George W. Bush, shields gun manufacturers and dealers from liability when crimes are committed with their products. The law includes exceptions which Mexicos lawyers sought to invoke.
The original suit by Mexico, which named multiple U.S.-based gun manufacturers as defendants, claimed that Mexicans "have been victimized by a deadly flood of military-style and other particularly lethal guns that flows from the U.S. across the border." It also argued that U.S. companies were negligent in their sales practices, claiming that the gun companies "are not accidental or unintentional players in this tragedy; they are deliberate and willing participants, reaping profits from the criminal market they knowingly supply."
In response, lawyers for Smith & Wesson argued in a filing that the lawsuit "faults the defendants for producing common firearms" and for "failing to restrict the purchase of firearms by regular citizens." They made the case that "aiding and abetting criminal activity must involve something more than making products generally." Ultimately, the Supreme Court agreed with this reasoning.
In reference to the injunctive relief that Mexico asked the court to grant, lawyers for Smith & Wesson asserted that the lawsuit was "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."
According to some estimates, more than 250,000 firearms are smuggled from the United States into Mexico each year. In contrast, Mexico has one gun store and issues fewer than 50 new gun permits each year. The U.S. is the largest firearm exporter in the world, partly due to relaxed gun laws within the country.
The unanimous decision marks the first ruling by the Supreme Court where the PLCAA is cited and could serve as precedent for protecting weapons manufacturers in future cases. The 9-0 ruling suggests strong judicial consensus on the limits of civil liability for gun manufacturers under federal law. It is seen as a win by gun rights activists, with the NRA arguing in their amicus brief on the case that "Mexico has extinguished its constitutional arms right and now seeks to extinguish Americas."
Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson each issued concurring opinions, with Jackson writing that Mexicos lawsuit targeted industry-wide practices that Congress has chosen not to prohibit and Thomas arguing that violations of U.S. law must be established in court for the PLCAA exceptions to be valid.
James Eustis is an intern at RealClearPolitics. He studies politics at Washington & Lee University.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
13 minutes ago
- Fox News
Father of vindicated Karen Read warns concerned Americans 'the next Karen Read could be you' in new interview
Karen Read's father, Bill Read, opened up about his family's experience throughout her three-and-a-half-year legal saga in a candid new podcast interview. His 45-year-old daughter faced murder and other charges in the Jan. 29, 2022, death of her then-boyfriend, John O'Keefe, a Boston cop whom prosecutors alleged she mowed down with a Lexus SUV and left to die in a blizzard. The defense argued that she had never struck him, police had conducted a faulty investigation, and someone else had killed him. After a mistrial, jurors the second time around found her not guilty of all homicide-related charges and found her guilty of driving under the influence of liquor. Speaking with Billy Bush on his live show, "Hot Mics with Billy Bush," the elder Read said he believes his daughter had been the target of a corrupt investigation from the start and that she wouldn't have put up such a fight if she had had something to hide. "I can tell you, as a parent, no parent, no loved one, no significant other in this life should go through what my wife and I and our daughter have gone through these three and a half years, so I say to everyone out there, take back your government," Read said. "If you don't like what your leaders are doing in the criminal justice system, get them out. Take back your government, because the next Karen Read could be you." The younger Read and O'Keefe spent the night of Jan. 28, 2022, drinking in Canton, Massachusetts. They went to two bars before driving to an after party at the home of another Boston cop named Brian Albert. Prosecutors and the defense disagree about what had happened after they had gotten there just after midnight. At around 6 a.m., Read and two friends returned to the address to find O'Keefe dead on the front lawn under a dusting of snow. Police initially charged her with drunken driving manslaughter and fleeing the scene, but prosecutors later secured an indictment for the more serious charge of second-degree murder. Jurors ultimately cleared her of all of those allegations but agreed that she had drunk alcohol before getting behind the wheel. "We're very close. She is very candid. She's very truthful, and had she hurt John O'Keefe, she told me, she said, Dad, 'If I thought I hurt him, I'd own up to it. . . . But I did not strike him,'" the elder Read told Bush. "And I believed her." If you don't like what your leaders are doing in the criminal justice system, get them out. Take back your government, because the next Karen Read could be you. Plus, he said, the state's case was unconvincing and weak. "When you just look at the evidence, the wounds to the body, the lack of damage to the car, and then couple that with the physics, the science, the medical testimony..." he said. He took particular issue with the autopsy photos, and he said that's what had prompted her to reach out to attorney Alan Jackson, the Los Angeles lawyer who added a jolt to her legal team at trial. "Karen Read is the engine, the transmission in this bus. She's the fifth attorney," her father said. Imagine waking up every day in your 70s for 3 1/2 years knowing the people elected to serve you and assigned to protect you are trying to put your daughter in prison for life for something she did not do. That was Bill Read's reality. Read, who went up to every sidebar with her lawyers at trial, already had a prominent Boston-area attorney, David Yannetti, when she brought in Jackson and Elizabeth "Liza" Little. For her second trial, she also added New York's Robert Alessi. Bush also asked Read about his own relationship with O'Keefe. Could he have seen him as a son-in-law if things got that far? "I can't say that," he said, adding, "I liked the man." GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB They really bonded over sports, he said. "I saw John O'Keefe as really an athlete," he said. "You could see his style throwing the football with him. You could see he had it in his blood." He also said that his daughter can't have kids of her own but crafted a bond with O'Keefe's niece and nephew, whom he had adopted after their parents died. SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER "Karen was never going to be able to biologically have children, and I'm not sure that she would be necessarily one that would willingly embrace children. But those two children, she saw as an opportunity to provide a female presence in their life," he said. O'Keefe's niece testified against his daughter at trial and is a plaintiff in the family's wrongful death lawsuit against her. But jurors still found too many holes in the state's case. "Imagine waking up every day in your 70s for 3 ½ years knowing the people elected to serve you and assigned to protect you are trying to put your daughter in prison for life for something she did not do," Bush told Fox News Digital. "That was Bill Read's reality." Read received a year of probation for the drunken driving conviction. She is still facing a wrongful death lawsuit from O'Keefe's family, which her civil defense team asked the court to dismiss earlier this month. The case prompted the residents of Canton, Massachusetts, to demand an independent audit into their local police department, which found no evidence of a "conspiracy to frame" Read but faulted local police for a series of mistakes, including failure to photograph the victim's body before it was moved, failing to lock down the crime scene and conducting witness interviews outside of headquarters. State police also launched an internal probe into the lead homicide detective, Michael Proctor, who was fired for sharing confidential information with civilians outside of law enforcement and drinking on the job. He is appealing his dismissal. There was also a federal grand jury empaneled in the case, and one of the jurors pleaded guilty to leaking secret information earlier this week.


Axios
42 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump comes for American lore with pop agenda
In his second term, President Trump is making a habit of taking action on topics plucked from America's popular imagination that had previously been non-existent in Washington's policy playbook. Why it matters: Trump's voracious appetite for generating attention and marketing his policies has bred ideas that inject the power of the presidency into deep recesses of American life and culture. Driving the news: This past week, Trump announced that Coca-Cola had agreed to use real cane sugar in Coke. For decades, high-fructose corn syrup has sweetened the drink. (The company hasn't confirmed his claim.) The topic has been steadily gaining attention in the U.S., with interest in Mexican Coke — which uses cane sugar — rising for years, according to Google Trends. The big picture: We all know "kitchen-table issues," the topics shaped by decades of campaign trail debates. But these are "group-chat issues" — stuff you'd text your friends about that doesn't usually get picked apart by policy wonks. Alcatraz: Trump stunned the country by announcing this spring that the notorious prison island — closed for more than 60 years — would be reopened. The move is inspired "more by symbolism than necessity," Axios' Marc Caputo reported. The penny: The administration took action on the ultimate pocketbook issue by announcing plans to discontinue the 1-cent coin. While the move makes economic cents — pennies now cost more to make than they're worth — the bigger impact could the cultural ripple of an extinct piece of American iconography. Gulf of America: Trump caught Americans off guard when he edited U.S. maps on his first week in office. The seemingly superficial move led to profound fallout over press freedom and geopolitics. JFK files: He indulged a decades-long national fascination about the JFK assassination by releasing 63,000 pages of records — a topic that had largely been left to amateur sleuths and conspiracy theorists. While the records added color to the understanding of the event, there were no bombshells. Reality check: Trump finds himself on the other side of a group-chat issue with his posture on the Jeffrey Epstein case. He is fighting against the populist current demanding more information and transparency around Epstein's sex trafficking operation, while disavowing his supporters who continue to press him. Zoom in: On some lesser-noticed, Seinfeldian issues, Trump addressed everyman gripes with the stroke of a pen.


CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
The long road Idaho prosecutors sought to spare the families of Bryan Kohberger's victims by avoiding a death penalty trial
When the men who murdered Carmen Gayheart were sentenced to death in 1995, her sister, Maria David, thought it might be 12 or 14 years before they were executed. She waited 31. Life went on. David got married and had two boys. The family left Fort Lauderdale, Florida, she said, because it was too hard to live there with all the memories of Carmen, herself a mother of two and an aspiring nurse. But 'for every good thing in my life, there was a sad shadow hanging over,' David said – because of what happened to Carmen, and the long wait for the executions. David would open the mailbox and find an envelope from the attorney general's office, informing her that her sister's killers had filed another appeal. Another envelope would follow with the state's response, then another with the court's opinion. Later, another envelope. Another appeal. For three decades, she worked to see the executions carried out, calling state officials and her victim's advocate, writing letters and attending hearings for the inmates' appeals so they would know Carmen's family had not forgotten. 'I devoted a lot of time to that. I feel like I put my family second a lot,' David told CNN. 'I think a lot of times I did put the kids in front of the TV more to get online and read something or to write a letter or, you know, just immerse myself in that, more so than my own life.' David's experience is not uncommon for the loved ones of victims in capital cases. Her story illustrates the long road Idaho prosecutors say they wanted to spare the families of four University of Idaho students killed in November 2022 by agreeing to a plea deal that would see the confessed killer avoid a possible death sentence. Instead, Bryan Kohberger will be sentenced this week to life in prison without parole, and he'll forfeit his right to appeal. The agreement received mixed reactions from the families of Ethan Chapin, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Madison Mogen. The fathers of Goncalves and Kernodle expressed anger, criticizing prosecutors for not adequately consulting the families before agreeing to the deal. 'We'll never see this as justice,' Steve Goncalves told CNN's Jim Sciutto. Others voiced acceptance, saying they were relieved to avoid a drawn-out trial and the possibility of a yearslong appeals process. The Chapin family's 'initial response was, 'an eye for an eye,'' Ethan's mother told NBC's 'Today.' 'But we've spent a ton of time talking about it with prosecutors, and for us, we always felt like this was a better deal.' This split highlights how the death penalty – and the possibility of it – affects victims' loved ones, often referred to as survivors or co-victims, in deeply personal ways. They are not a monolithic group; resolution can mean something different to each person. 'Every co-victim of murder is different in what their needs are and are going to be different in how they see those needs being met and are going to be different in how they see justice being served,' said Scott Vollum, a professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth who has studied violence, the death penalty and its effect on co-victims. To try and determine if the death penalty helps or provides closure to co-victims writ large, he said, is a 'conclusion that denies some people the validity of how they feel.' Had Kohberger gone to trial, there was no guarantee he would have been sentenced to death. If he were, it likely would have been years, even decades, before an execution – and even that would not be certain. For victims' families, a death sentence is not the end of a journey but the beginning of one. While some may find solace in the end, for many – even those who support the execution – the intervening years of appeals and uncertainty often reopen old wounds. 'It was difficult,' David told CNN several weeks after witnessing the execution of one of the men who killed her sister. 'It was a long road, hard road, sad road. Infuriating at times, because you just don't realize how long it's going to take.' 'You just don't realize 31 years is going to happen.' Death penalty cases take a long time to conclude because of the finality of execution. Once put to death, an inmate can no longer appeal to remedy any errors in their case. The appeals process following a death sentence is meant to be thorough, ensuring the defendant is truly guilty and deserving of the ultimate punishment, which is legal under federal law and in 27 states, though governors in four of those states have suspended executions. That means victims' families often wait years to see an execution. As of 2024, an inmate spent an average of 269 months – more than 22 years – on death row awaiting execution, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. 'Many victims in death penalty cases describe getting victimized by the system,' said Samuel Newton, a law professor at the University of Idaho. He likened this appellate process to an 'emotional juggernaut' for survivors. 'We're talking eight, nine, 10, 12 legal proceedings that will take decades to resolve,' he told CNN. Roger Turner waited two decades to see the man who killed his father, Henry Lee Turner, put to death. Even 10 years would have been too long, he said. 'That's additional suffering that does not need to happen.' Turner had long ago forgiven the killer, citing his Christian faith. But he struggled with the case's repeated resurfacing, which forced Turner to relive the ordeal of his father's murder and the night in 2005 when his dad – a kind man who would lend a hand to anyone in need, including his killer – didn't meet him as expected. 'I'd kind of forget about him for a little while,' Turner said of the killer, 'and then, boom. It would come up in the news. It was always there.' 'I know that I can go on with my life,' he told CNN after witnessing the execution in June. 'But that still doesn't change the fact that I had to carry that burden for 20 years, in my mind and on my shoulders.' An execution – or even a death sentence – is not a foregone conclusion, even in high-profile, notorious cases like the one in Idaho. Anthony Montalto would have willingly waited and endured many appeals to see the man who murdered his daughter in the 2018 Parkland shooting executed, he said. Though the shooter pleaded guilty to murdering Gina – whom her father fondly remembers for her smile, her personality and her desire to help others – and 16 students and staff, the jury did not unanimously recommend the death penalty, resulting in a sentence of life without parole. 'Given the trade-off … I would have accepted that,' Montalto told CNN of the lengthy appeals process. 'When you lose a child, you think about her every day. There's no day that will ever be truly happy again after you have your daughter murdered.' Even when imposed, a death sentence may not be carried out. Convictions or death sentences can be overturned during appeals, and some defendants may be spared from execution. A governor, for instance, might grant clemency, pause executions in their state or clear death row altogether. A Death Penalty Information Center analysis of more than 9,700 death sentences found that fewer than one in six death sentences will lead to an execution. Additionally, at least 200 people since 1973 have been wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death before later being exonerated, according to DPIC – underscoring the importance of a thorough appeals process. And it's always possible a defendant will die of other causes before entering the execution chamber. One of Carmen Gayheart's two killers died in prison two years ago 'without accountability,' David, her sister, said. 'That was really a sucker punch.' After enduring all this, survivors may have the opportunity to witness an execution. But resolution is subjective, and whether the execution brings peace or comfort to a victim's loved one will vary from person to person. The idea of 'closure,' however, is one Vollum believes is 'somewhat of a myth.' 'That word, 'closure,' even amongst co-victims, often gets rejected,' he said, even by those who desire an execution. 'Closure,' he believes, is an idea imposed on co-victims by politicians and policymakers, who have promised an execution will 'be a magical point of closure.' But the loss of a loved one is never over, he said. Instead, co-victims will refer to an execution as the start of 'a new chapter,' or something that helps them 'turn a page, and maybe move on to a different stage in life.' Not everyone feels that way. Some co-victims oppose executions, perhaps wanting the killer to live with their crimes, or hoping to later seek answers from the perpetrator, he said. Others who witness an execution, he said, may leave the death chamber dissatisfied, either because they don't feel resolution or because they feel the process focused on the offender rather than the victims. 'I think a lot of people are promised that this will somehow bring them some kind of catharsis or some kind of healing,' he said, 'and I think to some degree that's false hope for individuals who are experiencing a loss that isn't so easily remedied by another act of violence.' 'That's not to say,' he added, 'that there aren't co-victims that feel better having seen the offender that killed their loved one executed, whether seeing it directly or knowing that it happened.' Maria David is one of them. Before the execution of her sister's surviving killer last month, she was skeptical it would bring her relief. But after she and 16 family members gathered to witness the execution, she felt differently. It wasn't immediate, she said. But a couple of hours later, she and her family visited Carmen's grave, lighting candles in the dark. She felt a sense of peace. The next day, she looked out the window and saw a rainbow – a sign, she said, from Carmen. 'I do feel differently than I thought I would,' she said. 'I felt like, prior to that, it was just closing the legal chapter and that, of course, I'm never going to get over what happened to her.' 'But I do feel calm. I feel better. They're dead now,' she said. 'There is not another piece of paperwork that is going to come here regarding either one of them. That is a blessing in and of itself. And I do feel like I'm going to be more on a healing journey than anything else – focus more on myself, taking care of myself better and my family.' CNN's Elizabeth Wolfe, Julia Vargas Jones and Norma Galeana contributed to this report. Correction: An earlier version of this story misidentified the Florida city Maria David left following her sister's death. Her family moved away from Fort Lauderdale.