On Tuesday, the Supreme Court seemed to block a historic demand for $ 10 billion against the weapons manufacturers of the United States, since conservative and liberal judges expressed concerns about allowing the Government of Mexico to hold the firearms manufacturers responsible for the violence of the posters to the south of the border.
Federal Law grants wide immunity to the weapons industry, partly to protect expensive litigation companies that could get them out of the business. Mexico alleges that the law creates an exception to “help and incite” illegal sale and arms trafficking, which companies deny.
Mexico has only a arms store, but it is flooded with millions of weapons made in the United States, most channeled in the country by straw buyers in the United States. The country claims companies, including Smith & Wesson, Gock, Beretta and Colt, distribute and sell their weapons to be trafficked.
By An estimateAt least 200,000 weapons flow south of the border every year. The country seeks $ 10 billion in damage and security requirements forced to the Court around the marketing and distribution of weapons.
“The broken laws here are designed to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. Those violations put weapons in the hands of criminals and those criminals damaged Mexico,” said Cate Stetson, a lawyer from Mexico, to the Supreme Court.
“These acts were predictable,” he added. “This court does not need to answer for the accusations of Mexico, but it must assume that they are true … Mexico should have the opportunity to prove their case.”
The weapons seized by customs and border protection of the United States during south inspections are shown in the port of Nogales, Arizona, without date, file photo.
CPB/DVID
Many of the judges seemed not to be convinced by the case of Mexico should be able to advance.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor suggested that the alleged damage to the violence of the poster that date back to Mexico are too far from the decisions of manufacturers to distribute their products.
“We have repeatedly said that mere knowledge is not enough [for liability]”Sotomayor said.” You have to help and drink somehow. You have to pretend and take affirmative measures to … participate in what they are doing. “
Judge Elena Kagan questioned what she perceived as a lack of specificity in the accusations of Mexico.
“There are many [gun] Distributors And you are just saying [the gunmakers] Know some of them [engage in trafficking]. But what are some of them? I mean, who are they helping and inciting this complaint? “Kagan said.
After Stetson alleged a deliberate marketing of arms to the posters, the president of the Supreme Court John Roberts expressed the skepticism of the claim.
“I mean, there are some people who want the experience of shooting a particular type of weapon because they find it more pleasant than using a BB gun,” he said. “And I wonder exactly what the accused is supposed to, the manufacturer must do in that situation. Do you say no, should not market a particular legal firearm because they will go to Mexico to a higher percentage than others?”
The Supreme Court in Washington, June 30, 2024.
Susan Walsh/AP, file
Judge Brett Kavanaugh raised concern about the broader implications of a decision that allows Mexico’s demand to advance.
“What do you do with the suggestion on the other side … that your theory of helping and installing responsibility would have destructive effects in the US economy in the sense that … Many sellers and manufacturers of ordinary products know that they will be misused by a subset of people?” asked. “They know that, with certainty, that it will be pharmaceutical products, cars, what, you can name many products. So that is a real concern, I think.”
Stetson replied: “If you have a product manufacturer of a dangerous product that alleges that did all the things that know who they sell and what is being done with that product, then and only then, I think, that product manufacturer … has a problem.”
According to an Evertown analysis, more than 160,000 people in Mexico were murdered by weapons between 2015 and 2022, according to an Eventown analysis for arms security.
A large majority of the weapons involved in the shootings came from US border states. According to a report by the United States Government Responsibility Office, more than 40% of illegal weapons were seized in Mexico for a period of five years.
Only in 2023, more than 2,600 firearms were seized to Mexico, 65% more than the previous year, according to the Department of National Security, and 115,000 rounds of ammunition headed by the same direction were captured, 19% more than 2022.
A Federal District Court dismissed the case of Mexico in 2022 citing immunity under federal law. The First Court of Appeals of the United States Circuit reversed that decision in early 2024, saying that Mexico had presented a plausible case of responsibility under the exception of the law.
The Supreme Court is expected to decide at the end of June if a case of responsibility can advance or not.
