Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen is spearheading a coalition of 28 states in urging the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to protect American firearm manufacturers from liability claims brought by the Mexican government. In a brief filed Tuesday, the coalition challenges a lower court ruling that Mexico alleges could hold U.S. gun manufacturers responsible for violence within its borders.
The coalition argues that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit erred in its ruling, which embraced a broad interpretation of causation rejected by SCOTUS in the past. Mexico contends that American gun makers contribute to its gun violence crisis, claiming that some firearms are unlawfully trafficked into the country. However, the coalition asserts that this argument is unsupported by evidence and directly conflicts with the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which shields firearm manufacturers from liability for criminal misuse of their products.
“Mexico has the tools to address its own gun violence problems,” said Attorney General Knudsen in the brief. “It could identify and report gun dealers allegedly selling to cartels, negotiate extraditions, or strengthen its border security. What it cannot do is undermine the lawful manufacturing of American firearms or impose its policy preferences on the United States through judicial means.”
Knudsen criticized the First Circuit’s ruling, which he argued stretches proximate causation—a legal standard linking actions to consequences—beyond recognition. This expansive interpretation, the brief asserts, threatens to dismantle the protections of the PLCAA and open the door to lawsuits that could cripple the U.S. firearms industry and infringe on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
The case stems from a lawsuit Mexico filed in a Massachusetts federal court in 2022, seeking damages from U.S. gun manufacturers for violence linked to cartels. The case was initially dismissed, but the First Circuit later reversed that decision, claiming Mexico’s lawsuit fell under a narrow PLCAA exception related to firearms law violations that directly cause harm.
Knudsen and the coalition argue that this interpretation misrepresents PLCAA’s intent and overlooks key facts, including that:
- Mexico’s own war on cartels is a primary driver of violence.
- Cartels predominantly use military-grade weapons, not firearms from U.S. retailers.
- Eliminating American gun manufacturing would not restrict cartel access to weapons.
The coalition emphasized that the case could set a dangerous precedent for undermining PLCAA protections, exposing gun manufacturers to unwarranted liability and threatening law-abiding Americans’ access to firearms.
“That Mexico disagrees with our Nation’s history and tradition of firearm ownership is irrelevant,” the brief states. “This lawsuit recycles failed anti-gun strategies already rejected by Congress. SCOTUS should reverse this decision.”
The brief is backed by attorneys general from 27 other states, including Alabama, Texas, Florida, and Virginia, along with the Arizona Legislature. Together, the coalition reinforces a unified stance in defending the U.S. gun industry and preserving longstanding legal protections.
SCOTUS’s decision on whether to hear the case could have sweeping implications for the future of gun rights and manufacturer liability in the United States
