Supreme Court bars Mexico from suing gun manufacturers over cartel violence

In June 2025, the Supreme Court delivered a unanimous ruling blocking a lawsuit from Mexico against major U.S. gun manufacturers. The Mexican government had sought to hold these companies accountable for the flow of firearms into Mexico, claiming they were responsible for aiding drug cartels by indirectly allowing for the trafficking of their weapons. The case stemmed from the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which prevents gun manufacturers from being sued for the actions of third parties misusing their products. Mexico's complaint was based on allegations that U.S. companies knowingly supplied firearms to illegal dealers who sold them to criminals in Mexico. The Supreme Court's opinion, articulated by Justice Elena Kagan, stated that Mexico failed to provide specific allegations showing that gunmakers had directly aided or abetted illegal sales. Instead, Kagan emphasized that the lawsuit described general assertions without naming individual retailers involved in illegal activities. The Court pointed out that simply knowing that some firearms might end up in the hands of criminals doesn't establish liability under PLCAA. The justices expressed apprehension over allowing such lawsuits, fearing that it would hold manufacturers responsible for the anticipated misuse of their goods. The ruling highlighted the complexities surrounding gun violence and the trafficking of firearms between the U.S. and Mexico, where estimates suggest that around 200,000 guns are smuggled into Mexico annually. The Mexican government's claim for $10 billion in damages was dismissed based on the Court's interpretation of the law, which was designed to shield gun manufacturers from lawsuits stemming from the misuse of their firearms. The Court held that knowing illegal sales could occur but not being directly involved is insufficient for liability. Following the decision, opinions from legal experts revealed a divide on the issue of gun manufacturer immunity from civil suits. While some argued that the ruling upholds the protection of manufacturers, others expressed concern about its implications for victims of gun violence. The case underscores the challenges faced by Mexico as it grapples with escalating violence partly attributed to gun trafficking. Advocacy groups have called for reevaluating the protections provided to gun manufacturers, emphasizing that the current framework may hinder efforts to hold them accountable for the societal consequences of their products.