Weatherford, TX — In a decisive 9-0 ruling, the United States Supreme Court struck down an audacious attempt by the Mexican government—backed by prominent U.S. gun control advocates—to hold American gun manufacturers civilly liable for violent crimes committed by drug cartels in Mexico.

The ruling in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos is a resounding victory for the Second Amendment, American sovereignty, and the rule of law.

The Mexican Government’s Lawsuit: A Trojan Horse for Gun Control

Filed in 2021, Mexico’s lawsuit accused several U.S. gun makers, including Smith & Wesson and Glock, of “aiding and abetting” cartel violence.

The claim?

That these companies should be held responsible for the illegal smuggling and use of firearms by transnational criminal organizations.

But let’s be clear: what Mexico—and their American allies in the gun control lobby—were really doing was trying to backdoor an end-run around Congress and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was enacted in 2005 to prevent exactly this kind of politically motivated litigation.

The PLCAA protects firearms manufacturers and sellers from being held liable when their products are misused by criminals.

That’s not a loophole—it’s common sense.

We don’t sue Ford when a drunk driver kills someone, nor should we sue Smith & Wesson when a drug cartel uses a firearm they obtained illegally.

If the lawsuit had succeeded, it would’ve opened the floodgates for anti-gun activists to bankrupt America’s firearms industry via endless lawsuits—potentially making gun ownership impossible through de facto regulation by litigation.

Gun Control Lobby’s Collusion with Mexico

Behind the scenes, this wasn’t just Mexico acting on its own.

U.S. gun control groups—including Everytown and Giffords—played an instrumental role in coordinating the lawsuit.

Legal scholars sympathetic to gun control even helped Mexico develop its legal strategy.

This was part of a broader trend: when the gun control lobby fails legislatively, they turn to foreign governments and activist courts to do their bidding.

It’s the same playbook used when they pushed Mexico to claim standing in U.S. courts, despite the clear protections offered to manufacturers under American law.

The Supreme Court’s Ruling: A Body Blow to Activist Lawfare

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for a unanimous Court, made it clear that Mexico’s case did not meet the legal bar for aiding and abetting.

As the Court explained, merely selling guns legally through regulated channels, even if some might later be trafficked, does not equate to encouraging or knowingly facilitating criminal acts.

The Court leaned heavily on precedent, including Twitter v. Taamneh, which emphasized that a business cannot be held liable merely because bad actors use its product.

In plain terms: if you sell a legal product through legal means, you are not liable for someone else’s criminal misuse of that product.

This is a cornerstone of our justice system—and of capitalism itself.

Had the Court ruled the other way, every manufacturer of a potentially dangerous product—cars, knives, even pharmaceuticals—could have been held liable for criminal misuse.

But make no mistake: the gun industry was the intended target.

Why This Matters for Gun Owners

This wasn’t just about protecting manufacturers—it was about protecting your right to bear arms.

Had Mexico and the gun control lobby prevailed, they would’ve crippled gun makers with lawsuits, raised prices on all firearms, and likely driven smaller manufacturers out of business.

The ripple effects would’ve choked off supply, limited innovation, and made gun ownership an elite privilege rather than a right of the people.

The Court’s decision sends a strong message: foreign governments do not get to dictate American gun policy, and activists cannot sue away constitutional rights.

A Crushing Defeat for the Anti-Gun Machine

This is more than just a legal loss for the gun control lobby—it’s a strategic collapse.

Their multi-year effort to use Mexico as a legal proxy has now exploded in their face.

Even liberal justices on the Supreme Court saw through the charade.

This ruling also undermines future legal activism designed to bypass democratic institutions.

The gun control lobby’s dream of regulating guns by litigation, rather than through Congress, has just suffered a fatal blow.

While the gun control lobby will undoubtedly seek new angles to erode our rights, this ruling gives defenders of liberty a strong legal foundation to push back.

Gun owners, take heart: when we stand firm, we win.