[136 / 1 / 1]
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-mexico-737f69a7447647e13b49a2b1a7c72c57
Mexico's cartel picked communist president sued US gun makers for $10 billion. the SCOTUS dismissed the suit
>Congress passed the law two decades ago to halt a flurry of lawsuits against gunmakers that were similar to the case Mexico filed, Justice Elena Kagan wrote. Her opinion overturned a lower court order that let the suit go forward because the companies themselves were accused of violating the law.
>Kagan wrote that Mexico’s lawsuit made no plausible argument that the companies had knowingly helped gun trafficking into the country.
Thomas and Jackson both wrote concurring opinions.
Oddly enough Kagan's majority opinion said
>Mexico ... focuses on the manufacturers’ production of “military style” assault weapons, among which it includes AR–15 rifles, AK–47 rifles, and .50 caliber sniper rifles. But those products are both widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers. (The AR–15 is the most popular rifle in the country. See T. Gross, How the AR–15 Became the Bestselling Rifle in the U. S., NPR (Apr. 20, 2023.)
Which makes declining to hear Snope v Brown weirder, but there are a bunch of AWB cases in the lower courts so the SCOTUS might just be waiting for a difference case like they waited a long ass time for Bruen.
NJ's AWB case had a democrat judge agree with Kagan during the last decision handed down. he said NJ couldn't ban ARs because they are in common use.
Logically there is no legitimate argument anyone can make for the banning of AR-15s based on the holdings of Miller (1938), Heller (2008) and Bruen (2021) as AR-15s, the most popular single model of guns sold in the US, are in common use for both militia proposes as well as general lawful use by citizens, as Kagan so eloquently pointed out in her brilliant majority opinion
Mexico's cartel picked communist president sued US gun makers for $10 billion. the SCOTUS dismissed the suit
>Congress passed the law two decades ago to halt a flurry of lawsuits against gunmakers that were similar to the case Mexico filed, Justice Elena Kagan wrote. Her opinion overturned a lower court order that let the suit go forward because the companies themselves were accused of violating the law.
>Kagan wrote that Mexico’s lawsuit made no plausible argument that the companies had knowingly helped gun trafficking into the country.
Thomas and Jackson both wrote concurring opinions.
Oddly enough Kagan's majority opinion said
>Mexico ... focuses on the manufacturers’ production of “military style” assault weapons, among which it includes AR–15 rifles, AK–47 rifles, and .50 caliber sniper rifles. But those products are both widely legal and bought by many ordinary consumers. (The AR–15 is the most popular rifle in the country. See T. Gross, How the AR–15 Became the Bestselling Rifle in the U. S., NPR (Apr. 20, 2023.)
Which makes declining to hear Snope v Brown weirder, but there are a bunch of AWB cases in the lower courts so the SCOTUS might just be waiting for a difference case like they waited a long ass time for Bruen.
NJ's AWB case had a democrat judge agree with Kagan during the last decision handed down. he said NJ couldn't ban ARs because they are in common use.
Logically there is no legitimate argument anyone can make for the banning of AR-15s based on the holdings of Miller (1938), Heller (2008) and Bruen (2021) as AR-15s, the most popular single model of guns sold in the US, are in common use for both militia proposes as well as general lawful use by citizens, as Kagan so eloquently pointed out in her brilliant majority opinion
