Posted on 11/12/2019 8:54:31 AM PST by Erik Latranyi
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt a blow to the firearms industry, rejecting Remington Arms Co's bid to escape a lawsuit by families of victims aiming to hold the gun maker liable for its marketing of the assault-style rifle used in the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre that killed 20 children and six adults.
The justices turned away Remington's appeal of a ruling by Connecticut's top court to let the lawsuit proceed despite a federal law that broadly shields firearms manufacturers from liability when their weapons are used in crimes. The lawsuit will move forward at a time of high passions in the United States over the issue of gun control.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The Supremes simply refused to hear the argument (didn’t rule) thus it’s back in State Court.....
This doesn’t bind them to actual ruling somewhere down the road once it played out in state court.....
Basically requiring all litigants to sharpen their arguments, get a state-level ruling before they consider...
The SCROTUS is useless.
Actually, they have to prove that Lanza saw the ad and chose to steal his mother’s Remington as a result.
Lanza did not buy the firearm...he stole it as an easy opportunity.
People who are not attorneys need to understand that the Supreme Court will do everything possible not to hear a case on procedural grounds. They are absolutely not ruling on the merits of the case here. All that is going on is that the Supremes have said that the case can go forward in the Connecticut Supreme Court. The plaintiffs in this case still have to prove causation, which is going to be very difficult to impossible since Remington sold a legal product that operated exactly as it was intended to do so. Remington has an extraordinarily strong case that it is not lisble, because they cannot be held responsible for the criminal actions of someone who was not even their customer.
If Remington somehow loses this case in Connecticut, they have an excellent basis for appealing it. The logical consequence of such a ruling would be that every automotive company is responsible for the injuries and deaths caused by drunk drivers, pool makers are responsible for drownings, etc. That is manifestly absurd, legally incoherent, would destroy the economy in about 5 minutes - and the federal courts know this.
Again, this decision was purely a procedural one, pay no attention to it.
Exactly. Cars kill more people than guns every year yet nobody sues the automobile manufacturers unless the death was caused by a manufacturing defect. Cars and guns usually work exactly as intended, so the fault generally lies with the maniac behind the wheel or trigger.
Next up: Ford / GM / Honda / Toyota liable for all car accidents
All the other industries should be quaking in their boots. Automobile manufacturers and alcohol producers will now be sued for drunk drivers’ accidents.
“The case hinges on an exception to this shield for claims in which a gun manufacturer knowingly violates the law to sell or market guns.”
Looks like the plaintiff has a high hurdle to jump.
Then Judges should be held personally liable for the economic effects of their rulings.
Starting with, let an illegal walk, own their future crimes.
SCOTUS refuses to hear yet another Second Amendment issue. The deep state establishment apparently controls it too.
CW2 is getting closer and closer.
The Court didn’t deal anyone a blow. It just declined to take the case at this time. The trial court granted a motion to dismiss, a preliminary matter. The Connecticut Supreme Court disagreed. Now it will proceed to trial. If the manufacturer wins, no need for SCOTUS to intervene. Not surprising they declined to take the case on a less than fully developed record.
The problem here isn’t that the case against Remington might be won. The problem is that it’s being allowed to go forward. By allowing this case to proceed it opens the door for every person with an axe to grind to sue firearms manufacturers thus placing an unsurvivable financial burden on them. Simply allowing a case like this to proceed is VERY MUCH likely to destroy the firearms industry in the US. Once that is accomplished all congress has to do is enact an import ban on firearms and POOF, the second Amendment has been nullified.
In this case, the Supreme Court violated the law by not deciding for protecting Remington who manufactured this weapon. Would the Supreme Court allow a lawsuit against General Motors because somebody used a vehicle it manufactured to plow into a crowd of people? Metoforically the same situation exactly! It shows how silly their decision is.
I haven’t found a break down of how this was decided. Was it a one judge thing or all of them? I don’t trust any of them.
I sure hope you’re right. But I am not hopeful. And I think we the people need to buy all the guns and ammo we can, while we still can.
Good post. Thanks. Not being a lawyer, I suspected something similar..
“I think the USSC won’t take it because it’s never been tried in a lower court.”
I don’t know that it has to. As far as I can tell there was an issue before the court as to whether or not the federal law confers immunity to manufacturers. Pretty cut and dried and should have been affirmed in 5 minutes but for the lazy, useless fools in robes. Would have saved Remington and other manufacturers tons of money and acid reflux. It’s a junk system,
I’m hoping they did this with the mindset of, “The PLCAA protects Remmington. Away with this crap. The lower courts need to learn to read the law.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.