Posted on 10/04/2005 11:41:23 AM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court refused Monday to block a lawsuit against gun manufacturers accused of negligence for firearms violence in the nation's capital.
An appeals court had said that the District of Columbia government and individual gun victims, including a man who was left a quadriplegic after being shot in 1997, could sue under a D.C. law that says gun manufacturers can be held accountable for violence from assault weapons.
The high court had been asked over the summer to use the case to strike down the statute, which gun makers said interfered with their right to sell lawful products.
The lawsuit could still be voided by a new federal law, however. The Senate voted in July to shield firearms manufacturers, dealers and importers from lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes. Action is pending in the House.
The District of Columbia has strict rules about gun possession, and justices had been told that its law interfered with the gun commerce in other states. Twelve states had urged the Supreme Court to hear the case and rule with gun makers: Alabama, Colorado, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia.
"The District of Columbia's statute threatens ... gun manufacturers with draconian penalties based on their lawful out-of-state commercial activity -- and on the criminal misconduct of third parties over whom the manufacturers have no control," justices were told in a filing by former Solicitor General Theodore Olson, now the lawyer for the gun companies.
The case does not involve the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms." Instead, it challenges the law under the Commerce Clause's ban on "direct regulation" of out-of-state commerce and on the due process clause.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit had ruled last spring in the case against Beretta USA Corp., Smith & Wesson Corp., Colt's Manufacturing Co (located in West Hartford), Glock Inc., and other companies.
"No due process issue is raised by legislation that seeks to redress injuries suffered by district residents and visitors resulting from the manufacture and distribution of a particular class of firearms whose lethal nature far outweighs their utility," Judge Michael Farrell wrote.
The case is Beretta v. District of Columbia, 05-118.
"a D.C. law that says gun manufacturers can be held accountable for violence from assault weapons."
What does it matter whether the gun you're shot with is an assault weapon, or a simple .45 revolver?
Sooner or later, it's the Republican party that is going to have to be pinned with blame for the actions of the courts since it refuses to change the direction of it.
ping
Better yet, how about auto manufacturers being sued for injuries by drunk drivers. That would be a better case.
I wonder what else is in the senate version if the normally pro-gun GOP House hasn't passed it.
Start prosecuting bars and alcoholic drink manufacturers and DWI and DWI deaths will go down. Same stupid logic. Nobody accepting responsibility.
This is going to be VERY bad - there is nothing now between a HUGE DC jury award. Can you imagine what the DC jury award is going to be?
"No due process issue is raised by legislation that seeks to redress injuries suffered by district residents and visitors resulting from the manufacture and distribution of a particular class of firearms whose lethal nature far outweighs their utility," Judge Michael Farrell wrote.
I always thought that their utility arose from their "lethal nature". Love my Bushmaster.
This is a poor start of the new session of the Supreme Court.
I think a better case to be made is when considering "No new taxes" and leaving Iraq with Saddam in power.
As I understand it, several "poison pill" amendments have been tacked on, including a functional ban on centerfire rifle ammunition.
Add to the list: cement blocks, guitar strings, good sewing scissors, kitchen knives, leatherman tools, exacto knives, and large rocks from the garden. And oh, socks filled with quarters. Nun chucks. Oak tree branches. We should all just have our arms pinned down at all times and no harm will occur.
SCOTUS is just letting the trial take place. It is not precluding any appeals that might be generated after the case is heard.
It's not the most informative article.
SCOTUS is irrelevant.
They have Prostituted themselves to the world and it is time that they be eliminated as a Part of Government.
3 monkeys with a dart board and a handful of darts could make better decision.
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.