The Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared skeptical of Mexico’s $10 billion lawsuit that accuses American gun manufacturers of aiding and abetting drug cartel crimes south of the U.S. border.

The dispute focused on whether the firearms industry remains immune from these types of claims in which its products allegedly are misused.

Due to a lack of specificity from the Mexican government, the justices struggled to understand which laws the gun manufacturers are alleged to have violated and whether there is a proximate cause between their making of guns and the commission of violence by a cartel.

“We don’t really see how the manufacturers are particularly violating a state and federal law,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Biden appointee.

“I am just trying to be clear about what is being alleged,” said Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, a Trump appointee.

The legal conflict before the justices involves gun makers Smith & Wesson, Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Glock, Beretta, Witmer Public Safety Group, Interstate Arms, Colt’s Manufacturing, Century International Arms and Sturm, Ruger & Co.

The justices will decide if the firearms production is the proximate cause of drug cartel crimes.

Noel Francisco, the attorney representing the firearm industry, said there’s no direct relationship between his clients’ conduct and the injury that the Mexican government is alleging. And, he said, there are too many intervening events between the making of a gun and it ending up in the hands of a bad guy.

“No case in American history supports that theory,” Mr. Francisco said. “Here, you have a multitude of multiple intervening crimes.”

The companies say that the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong in advancing Mexico’s lawsuit.

Mexico has strict gun laws and only one store where people can legally buy firearms, The Associated Press reported. But thousands of guns are smuggled in by the country’s powerful drug cartels.

The Mexican government argues that 90% of guns recovered from crimes are trafficked by a specific group of dealers.

Catherine Stetson, the attorney representing the Mexican government, said the criminal acts were foreseeable and the gun makers know certain dealers are selling to cartels but not taking action.

“Mexico is not an indirect victim,” she said.


Ms. Stetson also said some of the gun models are advertised with Spanish names such as “el jefe,” which is marketing to cartels. “El jefe” means “the boss.”

Mr. Francisco said it is “offensive” to suggest using a Spanish name connects a gun to a cartel.

Mexico’s government also ran into issues with Justices Brett M. Kavanaugh and Samuel A. Alito Jr., who wondered what a ruling for it would do to other industries.

Justice Kavanaugh said there could be “destructive effects to the American economy” if manufacturers are held liable when their products are misused.

“That’s the real concern from me,” said Justice Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee. “How do you rule for you but don’t cause that problem?”

Justice Alito, a George W. Bush appointee, wondered if selling too much beer in a college town where there are underage drinkers could get a beer manufacturer in trouble.

He also said it seems as if Mexico can allege wrongdoing and sue a U.S. entity, but a U.S. state that alleges that Mexico contributes to crime cannot sue the Mexican government. 

“It’s a one-way street,” Justice Alito said.

In its brief, the Mexican government says that although U.S. gun companies may be protected from liability for lawful conduct under federal law, they should be held accountable when unlawful conduct is involved.

At issue is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which immunizes firearm manufacturers when their products are used in a crime.

A U.S. District Court initially dismissed the case, reasoning that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act bars lawsuits against firearms companies when their products are misused.

The justices are set to decide whether that law has an exception. A decision is likely to come by the end of June.

It is the first case involving the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act to reach the high court. The case is Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos.

• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.