Supreme Court Cites Federal Law in Tossing Out Mexico’s Gun Lawsuit
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously rejected a lawsuit brought by the Mexican government that tried to hold American gun manufacturers responsible for gun violence tied to drug cartels in Mexico. The decision protects the companies from being sued for billions in damages.
Why the Case Was Thrown Out : reverse discrimination
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for all nine justices, explained that the lawsuit could not move forward under a 2005 U.S. law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. This law generally shields gun companies from being sued when their weapons are used to commit crimes, unless there’s proof they broke other specific state or federal laws.
Mexico argued that the gunmakers had helped traffickers by intentionally supplying firearms to corrupt dealers. But the Court said Mexico didn’t provide solid evidence of that. Justice Kagan noted that the manufacturers sell their guns to independent distributors—not directly to any dealers, good or bad. Since Mexico never accused the distributors of wrongdoing, the Court found no reason to allow the case.
The Court chose a narrow path in its decision, focusing only on this specific lawsuit rather than creating a broader rule that could protect gun companies in future cases. This careful approach likely helped the justices agree unanimously.
David Pucino, a lawyer at the gun control advocacy group GIFFORDS Law Center, acknowledged the setback but emphasized that those who break the law can still be held accountable. “This decision ends Mexico’s lawsuit against the gun industry,” he said, “but not our efforts to enforce the law.”
Why Mexico Filed the Lawsuit
Filed in 2021, the lawsuit came at a tense time in U.S.–Mexico relations. While the U.S. was pressuring Mexico to crack down on the movement of migrants and drugs, Mexico was drawing attention to a different problem—American guns crossing the border.
Mexico sued Smith & Wesson and six other gunmakers for $10 billion. The country accused them of designing and marketing their firearms to appeal to drug cartels, pointing out flashy ads promoting military-style weapons with names like “El Jefe” (“The Boss”). According to Mexican officials, 70% to 90% of guns found at crime scenes in Mexico come from the U.S. Even though Mexico only has one legal gun store, the streets are full of American-made weapons.
Gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association called the lawsuit a backdoor attempt to weaken or even destroy the U.S. firearms industry by making them vulnerable to massive legal claims.
The lawsuit was initially blocked by a U.S. district court, but a federal appeals court later said Mexico could move forward. That led the gun companies to ask the Supreme Court to step in—which it now has.
Part of a Bigger Legal Pattern
The Court’s decision fits a broader trend of being cautious about lawsuits that try to blame companies for indirect harm. For example, in 2023, the Court rejected a case where the family of a victim of a 2017 terror attack in Turkey tried to sue Twitter. They argued that Twitter helped ISIS by hosting terrorist content. But the justices unanimously said the connection was too weak to hold the company legally responsible.
Though this ruling ends Mexico’s legal challenge against American gun manufacturers, it leaves the door open for future lawsuits—if there is clear proof of illegal behavior. For now, the Supreme Court has reinforced the strong legal protections that gunmakers enjoy under U.S. law.