From the 10/4/22 MA Lawyers Weekly:
Mexico, trying to piggy-back on the CT "consumer protection" judgment in the Sandy Hook case, attempted to sue numerous US gun manufacturers for its own crime problems. It lost.
"The Mexican government's lawsuit asserted claims for negligence, public nuisance, defective design, unjust enrichment, and violation of Massachusetts and Connecticut consumer-protection statutes.
'Defendants design, market, distribute, and sell guns in ways they know routinely arm the drug cartels in Mexico,' the plaintiff alleged. 'Defendants use reckless and corrupt gun dealers and dangerous and illegal sales practices that the cartels rely on to get their guns.'
However, in a Sept. 30 order, U.S. District Court Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted the defendants' motion to dismiss. The judge found a number of reasons to conclude that none of Mexican government's claims could get beyond the motion-to-dismiss stage.
But the main issue in the case was whether the plaintiff's lawsuit was barred by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Passed by Congress in 2005, the statute protects the firearm industry from civil liability for the criminal misuse of its products.
'The PLCAA unequivocally bars lawsuits seeking to hold gun manufacturers responsible for the acts of individuals using guns for their intended purpose,' Saylor wrote. 'And while the statute contains several narrow exceptions, none are applicable here.'”
If Mexico were truly concerned about the illegal importation of guns, it would secure its border with the US. It clearly has no intention of doing so, and can deal with the consequences of that failure.