Mexico v. United States Gun Manufacturers: The Next Big Second Amendment Ruling in the United States Supreme Court

For the past decade, the United States Supreme Court has heard just about 1% of cases brought [1]. The cases that most often end up in front of the Supreme Court are those that have questions directly relating to the Constitution, with rulings that will have repercussions for constitutional rights moving forward. The past two decades have seen an uptick in cases regarding Second Amendment rights, and the 2024-2025 cycle is no different.

On October 4, 2024, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a lawsuit from Mexico against American gun companies [2]. The case was first filed in a federal court in Boston in 2021 and underwent an appeal earlier in 2024. The original case was brought against seven United States gun manufacturers. After the appeal, the Supreme Court will only hear the defendants Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms, after the other five were removed for procedural reasons.

Mexico is claiming that Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms have aided and abetted in trafficking guns to Mexico. The main pieces of evidence that the prosecution points to are advertisements and designs targeting cartels. The prosecution has pointed to data from the United States Government Accountability Office that 70% of firearms recovered in Mexico from 2014-2018 originated in the U.S. [3].

This case was first filed in September 2021 in a federal court in Boston. Mexico brought a 10 billion dollar lawsuit against these U.S. gun manufacturers for “facilitating the trafficking of a deadly flood of weapons across the U.S.-Mexico border to drug cartels” [4]. Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor dismissed the case, citing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act as preventing standing for their case [5]. The law prohibits legal action against manufacturers for criminal or unlawful use of their firearms.

In January of 2024, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston would overturn Judge Dennis Saylor’s ruling. The U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta ruled that Mexico’s lawsuit “plausibly alleges a type of claim that is statutorily exempt from the PCAA’s [Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act] general prohibition” [6]. This law is meant to protect lawful commerce, but Mexico is arguing that the companies are taking illegal paths to aid illegal gun sales by Mexican cartels.

Mexico’s preferred outcome in this case would be monetary damages. Their original case asked for 10 billion dollars, which the Mexican government would use to get illegal U.S. firearms off the streets. The prosecution is additionally seeking a court order requiring that the companies make changes to stop targeting Mexican cartels in their marketing and design practices. 

However, Mexico has to wonder if the makeup of the current Supreme Court will rule in their favor. In 2008, the Roberts Court heard the case District of Columbia v. Heller [7]. A District of Columbia law had a strict law on handgun possession and registration. The law was brought to court and ended up reaching the Supreme Court. The Roberts Court held that the Second Amendment protects the rights of citizens to possess firearms, and the D.C. law violated these Constitutionally protected rights. 

While District of Columbia v. Heller expanded protections for Second Amendment rights, in June of 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of restricting some gun rights. In United States v. Rahimi, the current Justices of the Roberts Court ruled to restrict gun ownership for individuals who may pose a direct threat [8]. Rahimi challenged a law that stated he could not possess a firearm because of a domestic violence restraining order against him, on the grounds that the law infringes on his Second Amendment rights [9]. The Supreme Court ruled against Rahimi, deciding that a restraining order is valid grounds to infringe on those rights since it shows a credible threat to someone’s physical safety. 

Despite a conservative lean to the Roberts Court, rulings show that the Justices do see a line for restricting Second Amendment rights. The main difference between Mexico’s case and the existing precedent is that there are no existing international cases on the Second Amendment. This upcoming ruling will set a landscape for how cases brought against American companies by other countries will be decided.

Sources:

1. Pew, How the Supreme Court Decides Which Cases to Hear, Pew Trusts (2020). https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2020/11/24/how-the-supreme-court-decides-which-cases-to-hear
2. Kruzel, John, US Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Mexico’s Suit Against American Gun Companies, Reuters, (2024). https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-hear-challenge-mexicos-suit-against-american-gun-companies-2024-10-04/
3. Government Accountability Office, 21-336 (2021).
4.  Stempel, Jonathan, U.S. Judge Dismisses Mexico’s $10 Billion Lawsuit Against Gun Makers, Mexico to Appeal, Reuters, (2022). https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-dismisses-mexicos-10-bln-lawsuit-against-gun-makers-2022-09-30/
5. 15 USC Chapter 105 §7901 (2005).
6. Raymond, Nate, US Appeals Court Revives Mexico’s $10 Billion Lawsuit Against Gun Makers, Reuters, (2024). https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-appeals-court-revives-mexicos-10-billion-lawsuit-against-gun-makers-2024-01-22/
7. District of Columbia v. Heller, U.S. 570 (2008).
8. Rahimi v. United States, U.S. 602 (2024).
9. 18 U.S. Code § 922 - Unlawful Acts. (2014)