Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
The Supreme Court addressed whether the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) barred a lawsuit by Mexico against U.S. gun manufacturers. Mexico alleged that the manufacturers aided unlawful gun sales to Mexican cartels. The Court found Mexico's allegations insufficient under PLCAA, reversing the First Circuit's decision.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
The Court held that Mexico's complaint did not plausibly allege that the defendant gun manufacturers aided and abetted unlawful gun sales, thus PLCAA bars the lawsuit.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Preemption is relevant to Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
The case involves the application of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which preempts certain state and federal lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) bars certain lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers of firearms.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
The case addresses the allocation of authority between state and federal governments regarding the regulation of firearms and the ability to bring lawsuits against gun manufacturers.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)PLCAA's general bar on these suits has an exception, usually called the predicate exception, relevant here.
-
Why Standing is relevant to Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
The case involves the standing of a foreign government (Mexico) to bring a lawsuit in U.S. courts against American gun manufacturers.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Here, the Government of Mexico sued seven American gun manufacturers, alleging that the companies aided and abetted unlawful gun sales.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos that support the summary and concepts above.
PLCAA bars certain lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers of firearms.
Mexico's complaint does not plausibly allege that the defendant gun manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers' unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers.
Congress enacted PLCAA to halt lawsuits attempting to make gun manufacturers pay for harms resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearms.
