The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a New York law that permits state and private actors to sue gun manufacturers and sellers for contributing to gun violence, reported Jurist.
In its opinion, a three-judge panel rejected arguments that
the state’s law is preempted by the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA),
which shields gun makers from liability when their products are used
unlawfully.
Writing for the majority, Judge Eunice Lee held that New York’s
statute fits within PLCAA’s “predicate exception,” which allows liability where
gun sellers knowingly violate state or federal laws related to the marketing or
sale of firearms. Lee stated that “PLCAA’s text and history therefore do not
clearly establish that the statute’s aim was to prevent state legislatures from
creating avenues to hold gun manufacturers liable for downstream harms caused
by their products.”
The panel also dismissed claims that the law discriminates
against interstate commerce or violates the dormant
Commerce Clause.
Judge Dennis Jacobs, concurring, called the statute “a broad
public nuisance statute,” but agreed it survives a facial challenge under
federal law, leaving open the door to narrower as-applied preemption challenges
in future cases.
The ruling affirms a 2022 district court decision dismissing the case brought by the National
Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and major gun manufacturers, including Glock
and Smith & Wesson. NSSF general counsel Lawrence Keane argued that New
York’s law “is intended to evade the will of Congress” in its passing of the
PLCAA “to prevent baseless litigation from bankrupting an entire industry.”
In a statement, New York Attorney General Letitia James called
the decision “a massive victory for public safety and the rule of law” that
“will help [New York] continue to fight the scourge of gun violence to keep our
communities safe.”
To read more CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment