Appeals Court Upholds Law Holding Gunmakers Liable For Deadly Shootings

A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of a New York law that could hold gun manufacturers liable when their products are used in crimes. Gun rights advocates warn this decision is a serious threat to the firearm industry and the First Amendment.

Key Facts:

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a 2021 New York law targeting gun manufacturers and sellers.
Gun rights groups argued the law violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The court ruled the law does not impose an “undue burden” on firearm sales.
Judge Dennis Jacobs called the state law “an end run” around federal protections.
New York Attorney General Letitia James celebrated the decision as a win for public safety.

The Rest of The Story:

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a New York law that permits the state to sue gun manufacturers and sellers when their products are used in unlawful shootings.

The law, passed in 2021, aims to hold the industry accountable for what state officials call “misconduct” in the marketing and sale of firearms.

A three-judge panel concluded that the law doesn’t conflict with the 2005 federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which generally shields the gun industry from liability.

Judge Eunice C. Lee, writing for the court, said plaintiffs failed to prove that the law placed an undue burden on legal gun sales.

However, Judge Dennis Jacobs—while concurring with the result—criticized the state’s intentions.

He warned, “The intent of Congress when it closes a door is not for states to thus jimmy a window.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), representing the firearms industry, brought the legal challenge.

Senior VP Lawrence G. Keane said, “We earnestly believe this law is exactly what Congress had in mind when it passed PLCAA… [It] is designed to prohibit frivolous lawsuits.”

Attorney General Letitia James praised the ruling, claiming it allows the state to go after “bad actors” and will help curb gun violence.

Gun control advocates, such as Everytown Law, also cheered the outcome, calling it a new tool for victims and families to pursue legal action.

Commentary:

This ruling from the 2nd Circuit sets a dangerous precedent.

If allowed to stand, it could dismantle the protections Congress put in place with the PLCAA—protections meant to prevent the exact kind of lawsuits New York is now inviting.

The law doesn’t punish criminals; it punishes manufacturers who lawfully make and sell a legal product.

Holding a company responsible for how someone misuses their product is both illogical and unjust.

If a carmaker can’t be sued for a drunk driving crash, why should a gunmaker be sued for a shooting?

No firearm company can stay in business under the threat of endless litigation for crimes they didn’t commit.

The message this ruling sends is clear: manufacture guns, and you’re on the hook for what someone else does. That is a complete distortion of justice.

This is an outrageous attack on the First Amendment as well. Marketing speech is protected speech.

Suggesting that ads or product promotions can lead to liability inches us closer to a world where government decides which speech is acceptable.

Let’s be honest—this is political.

New York Democrats want to bankrupt gun makers without having to pass laws that would never survive constitutional scrutiny. So they’re using the courts as a backdoor.

It’s the same tactic activists use against other disfavored industries.

If this ruling is allowed to stand, what’s next? Will baseball bat manufacturers be sued when someone is assaulted with one? Should kitchen knife producers be liable for stabbings?

These are absurd questions, yet that’s exactly where this logic leads.

This ruling must be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The PLCAA was passed to prevent activist states from financially destroying an entire industry through politically motivated lawsuits.

Congress meant what it said—and it’s time the courts enforced it.