The U.S. Supreme Court does not appear to favor allowing Mexico’s contentious $10 billion lawsuit against American weapons manufacturers to proceed.
On Tuesday, the high court heard a 90-minute oral argument that claimed the domestic gun industry is to blame for Mexico’s epidemic of violence. The plaintiffs attempted to convince the nine justices that manufacturers are somehow culpable for drug cartels and gang activities.
Defendants include such traditional companies as Smith & Wesson, Glock, Beretta and Colt.
Justices on both sides of the political spectrum expressed skepticism over the Mexican government’s arguments.
Conservative Brett Kavanaugh told the plaintiffs that the repercussions of winning their lawsuit would be felt across the U.S. “Your theory of aiding and abetting liability would have destructive effects on the American economy. Lots of sellers and manufacturers of ordinary products know that they’re going to be misused by some subset of people. They know that to a certainty, that it’s going to be pharmaceuticals, cars, what you can name, lots of products. So that’s a real concern.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, generally a more liberal jurist, expressed similar concerns over Mexico’s position.
“We know that a straw seller is going to sell to someone who is going to use the gun illegally, because if they weren’t, they wouldn’t use the straw purchaser,” Sotomayor declared. “That illegal conduct is going to cause harm, and harm like this that the gun is going to be used in some way to injure people, correct?”
She observed that merely knowing something may happen is usually insufficient to establish liability. “You have to aid and abet in some way. You have to intend and take affirmative action to…participate in what they’re doing.”
Justice Elena Kagen noted the vagueness of Mexico’s case. “There are lots of [gun] dealers. And you’re just saying [the gunmakers] know that some of them [engage in trafficking]. But which some of them? I mean, who are they aiding and abetting in this complaint?”
Chief Justice John Roberts weighed in on Mexico’s assertion that the weapons industry markets their wares in a way that results in guns being trafficked south of the border.
“I mean, there are some people who want the experience of shooting a particular type of gun because they find it more enjoyable than using a BB gun,” Roberts said. “And I just wonder exactly what the defendant, the manufacturer, is supposed to do in that situation. You say no, he shouldn’t be marketing a particular legal firearm because they’re going to go into Mexico at a higher percentage than others?”
Arguing that their case should be heard, Mexico’s attorney Cate Stetson told justices that American gun manufacturers are liable for laws broken in the troubled nation.
“The laws broken here are designed to keep guns out of criminals’ hands,” Stetson claimed. “Those violations put guns in criminals’ hands and those criminals harmed Mexico. These acts were foreseeable. This court need not vouch for Mexico’s allegations, but it must assume they are true…Mexico should be given a chance to prove its case.”
Stetson further asserted that gun manufacturers have liability because of “who they’re selling to and what is being done with the product.”
Defense attorney Noel Francisco, representing Smith & Wesson, told justices that “no case in history supports that theory.”
Francisco added, “Indeed, if Mexico is right, then every law enforcement organization in America has missed the largest criminal conspiracy in history operating right under their nose, and Budweiser is liable for every accident caused by underage drinkers.”
The Supreme Court must decide if a lower court’s ruling that the case against gun manufacturers could continue was proper.
A decision is expected by June.
The Anti Anti-2A Social Club is more than a name—it’s a stand against misinformation, double standards, and the relentless attacks on our rights. It’s for those who are done being quiet and ready to push back against a narrative that seeks to misrepresent and marginalize us.
They say the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is one. But here’s the thing: we’re not trying to “solve” anything. We’re here to embrace our rights, to stand firm, and to protect what’s ours.
This isn’t just another t-shirt; it’s a symbol of defiance and a call to action for everyone who refuses to be silenced. The Anti Anti-2A Social Club T-shirts, hats, and drinkware represent a movement that knows our rights are non-negotiable and proudly defends them.
So click the link below and wear it with pride. Because being part of the Anti Anti-2A Social Club isn’t just a choice—it’s a badge of honor.
