Mexico’s Big Legal Battle Targets U.S. Gun Makers

Three handguns with bullets on a metal surface

Mexico’s legal battle against U.S. gun manufacturers has intensified as the case heads to the Supreme Court, despite concerns from producers and implications of this cross-border lawsuit for both nations.

Key Insights

The Supreme Court will decide if Mexico can hold U.S. gun manufacturers accountable for cartel violence.
A $10 billion lawsuit previously advanced by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals is at stake.
The case challenges the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, questioning the limits of U.S. gun laws.
Advocates aim for more accountability from gun manufacturers and international cooperation against gun violence.

The Core of the Legal Battle

Mexico claims that American firearms are smuggled into the country, fueling drug cartel violence. To combat this, the Mexican government filed a $10 billion lawsuit against U.S. gun manufacturers, which reached the Supreme Court after the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals allowed it to proceed. Previously dismissed due to a 2005 law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields manufacturers from liability, the court now evaluates whether these protections extend beyond the domestic market to companies potentially aiding gun smuggling.

Smith & Wesson, Glock, Colt, and Beretta are accused of fostering sales to “straw” buyers, suspect purchasers who funnel guns to cartel go-betweens. These allegations come amidst claims that over half a million U.S.-made firearms enter Mexico each year, undermining its stringent gun regulations. Discussions center on applying accountability for trafficking-induced violence, and some American gun control advocates, such as Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund and the Giffords Law Center, align with Mexico’s standpoint.

U.S. gunmakers get Supreme Court showdown in Mexico’s liability lawsuit over cartel violence https://t.co/0ZombC8DuC #Tucson #Arizona

— Tucson Sentinel (@TucsonSentinel) October 7, 2024

Implications for U.S. Gun Laws

Gunmakers argue that this case seeks to impose U.S. gun controls not legislated by Congress. They assert their sales do not directly cause harm since the weapons undergo independent criminal actions. However, with the Supreme Court set to deliberate in its upcoming term, questions arise over the jurisdiction and reach of U.S. gun laws, particularly in cross-border contexts.

“Mexico makes no secret that it abhors this country’s approach to firearms, and that it wants to use the American court system to impose domestic gun controls on the United States that the American people themselves would never accept through the ordinary political process,” said the attorneys representing the companies.

Amid these legal maneuvers, the broader concern encompasses how smuggling impacts public security in both countries. With nearly 90% of crime-linked guns in Mexico originating from a select group of U.S. dealers, the Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision will significantly impact not only this case but potentially prompt broader policy revisions. The decision is anticipated by the end of June, spotlighting international cooperation as a potential pathway forward.

President Suggests Renaming the U.S.

Emiliano Rodríguez Mega
08JAN2025

Leer en españolhttps://t.co/eQX5rRJLuj

President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico also said Donald Trump was ill-informed when he said Mexico was “essentially run by the cartels.”

Ms. Sheinbaum also said that… pic.twitter.com/xH3MccVev0

— fj (@gecko39) January 9, 2025

A Critical Case on the Horizon

Scheduled for oral arguments in March, the case, Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, marks a significant Supreme Court decision involving the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. As the justices deliberate, the matter also serves as an examination of corporate responsibility amid allegations of aiding illegal activities. As the annexed lawsuits mount, the Supreme Court’s decision may redefine the accountability of manufacturers in gun-related violence and hold broader implications for gun trafficking dynamics.

This legal battle underscores the ongoing complexities of managing cross-border gun violence and the measures nations might pursue to safeguard their citizens against such threats. Stakeholders across the continent await the forthcoming decision, which could shift the responsibilities of gun manufacturers and pave the way for more rigorous international collaboration in addressing these grave security concerns.