The anti-gun lobby has suffered one defeat after another trying to get around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), ever since it was signed into law in 2005.
It’s a common-sense statute that protects firearm manufacturers and dealers from liability when their products are used to commit a crime — just as we don’t hold auto makers responsible if a driver plows into a crowd of pedestrians.
But that doesn’t stop plaintiffs from trying.
They suffered their most recent defeat in June when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that the PLCAA blocked Mexico’s $10 billion lawsuit against some of America’s largest gunmakers, for crimes committed by Mexican criminal cartels.
Having failed at their attacks on the arms industry, anti-gunners are now going after the PLCAA itself. And they’re already seeing some limited success.
Last month the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a New York statute that flies in the face of the PLCAA. It permits New Yorkers who are injured by guns during the commission of a crime to sue gun companies for damages.
The opinion in the case, National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) v. Letitia James, was drafted by Judge Eunice Lee, a President Joe Biden appointee. She claimed that the New York law fell within the exceptions of the PLCAA.
“Neither the parties nor this court can divine Congress’s purpose in passing PLCAA beyond those aims expressly stated,” Judge Lee wrote. “Taken together, PLCAA’s text and history therefore do not clearly establish that the statute’s aim was to prevent state legislatures from creating avenues to hold gun manufacturers liable for downstream harms caused by their products.”
The decision was a head-scratcher for the NSSF, the premier trade association for the firearm industry.
“The Second Circuit’s decision is disappointing,” said Lawrence Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “We respectfully disagree with the court’s reasoning to uphold New York’s law. We earnestly believe this law is exactly what Congress had in mind when it passed PLCAA with a bipartisan majority.”
New York isn’t the only state attempting an end-run around the PLCAA. Six other states — California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Washington — have enacted similar statutes.
We can expect to see an appeal to the Supreme Court in the near future on this one.
Meanwhile Jonathan Lowy, the attorney who represented Mexico and got unanimously spanked by the Supreme Court two months ago, has come back for more.
He petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his appeal of Gustafson v. Springfield, Inc., after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the lawsuit against the gunmaker was barred by the PLCAA.
The plaintiff’s 13-year-old son was shot and killed by a friend using a firearm manufactured by the defendant. As tragic and horrifying as the facts are, the gunmaker can hardly be faulted.
Nevertheless the lawsuit attempts to shoehorn itself into the PLCAA’s list of exceptions, by alleging “defective design, negligent design and sale, and negligent warnings and marketing.”
In his petition to the high court, Lowy argues, in part, that the PLCAA was not a proper exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause.
In the words of Cam Edwards, a Bearing Arms editor and a frequent Newsmax TV contributor, Lowy “wants SCOTUS to axe [the] Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.”
The Supreme Court can’t allow that to happen. If they don’t agree to hear the New York case, if and when the NSSF files its petition, it should take up the Pennsylvania case.
The PLCAA has been a thorn in the side of anti-gun activists since it became law.
Former President Biden often criticized the statute, claiming that it held gunmakers and dealers absolutely free of liability, which is nonsense. They can still be sued on a number of other theories, such as defects in the design or manufacture of their products.
If, for whatever reason, the PLCAA is found unconstitutional, that would be the end of the U.S. arms industry, and with it, would make the Second Amendment worthless. The right to keep and bear arms would have little value if no one will make or sell them.
Anti-gunners often refer to shootings as “gun violence,” suggesting that the gun is at fault, but it’s not — it’s always the intentional or negligent fault of a person.
Monica Crowley, Chief of Protocol of the United States, observed that personal responsibility was one of America’s core foundational principles.
“I developed the concept of the Happy Warrior as a rallying cry for those of us who want to restore America to its great foundational principles: individual freedom, personal responsibility, fiscal restraint, and economic liberty.”
We can’t blame others, whether it’s a person, a business, or a government, for our own failings.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and is a frequent contributor to Newsmax. He’s also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and a Second Amendment supporter. Read Michael Dorstewitz’s Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
