In a decisive 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has thrown out a lawsuit from the Mexican government seeking $10 billion in damages from American gun manufacturers, delivering a major win for the firearms industry and a strong defense of U.S. sovereignty.
The case, which had been allowed to proceed by a lower court, accused gunmakers like Smith & Wesson, Colt, Beretta, and Glock of fueling cartel violence by allowing their products to be trafficked into Mexico. Mexico claimed the companies were complicit in the chaos, despite no evidence showing they directly violated any laws.
Writing for the Court, Justice Elena Kagan made it clear: the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) protects gunmakers from being held liable for the criminal misuse of their products by third parties. She noted that Mexico’s argument amounted to little more than an accusation of “indifference,” not “aiding and abetting” as required under the law.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Ketanji Brown Jackson both issued concurring opinions, with Thomas raising important legal questions about future interpretations of liability and Jackson emphasizing the complaint’s failure to cite any actual violations of U.S. law.
The ruling reverses a 2024 First Circuit decision that briefly gave Mexico’s lawsuit new life. The Supreme Court’s action not only halts this case but reaffirms the legal protections Congress granted to gun manufacturers under federal law—protections designed to stop politically motivated lawsuits from undermining the Second Amendment.
The Mexican government responded with defiance, vowing to continue legal efforts against U.S.-based firearm dealers. But the Court’s message was clear: the United States will not allow foreign governments to dictate domestic policy or weaponize the courts against American industries.
This unanimous ruling comes as a powerful reminder that constitutional protections and legal clarity still matter—especially in an era when foreign interests and activist litigation increasingly aim to reshape U.S. law from the outside in.