The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously to strike down a lawsuit filed by the government of Mexico against US-based gun manufacturers, with the Mexican government accusing multiple American companies of facilitating the “unlawful trafficking” of firearms to criminals across the border.
For context, according to coverage from Breitbart News on August 4, 2021, the Mexican government sued six gun manufacturers and one wholesale company, alleging “massive damage” caused by the businesses in the form of undermining laws and facilitating the trafficking of firearms into Mexico.
However, on June 5, 2025, press accounts confirmed that the lawsuit had been unanimously struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States, which ruled that Mexico’s case against the American gun companies did not have a basis in federal law, with Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, who was one of over 20 attorneys general involved in the case, stating, “American firearms manufacturers should not and do not have to answer for the actions of criminals.”
Furthermore, AG Knudsen said that based on the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, Mexico should be held responsible for the use of American-made weapons by criminal elements, adding, “Mexico’s bad policies created the country’s gun violence problem. Rather than take responsibility, Mexico and anti-gun activists are trying to blame and bankrupt American companies that follow the law. ”
Additionally, in the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision, Justice Elena Kagan expressed that the opinion of the Court was that while Mexico argued that “manufacturers supply firearms to retail dealers whom they know illegally sell to Mexican gun traffickers,” there was no grounds for the Mexican government to assert that “the manufacturers intentionally supply guns to bad-apple dealers.”
Continuing, Justice Kagan said that the Mexican government’s complaint had a blind spot in the form of their unwillingness to confront the fact that “the manufacturers do not directly supply any dealers, bad-apple or otherwise.” The judge continued, “They instead sell firearms
to middlemen distributors, whom Mexico has never claimed
lack independence.”
Building on her point, Justice Kagan argued that to make a compelling case, the Mexican government would need to “offer some reason to believe that the manufacturers attend to the conduct of individual gun dealers, two levels down.” She clarified, “But [the complaint] does not so much as address that issue.” Later, the judge added, “So Mexico’s allegation on this score is all speculation; even on a motion to dismiss, it is not enough.”
"*" indicates required fields
In addition, Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring statement, saying that the Mexican government “has not plausibly pleaded that its suit falls under the predicate exception to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act PLCAA).” Justice Thomas added, “This exception allows otherwise-prohibited suits against gun manufacturers to go forward if, among other requirements, the manufacturer has “knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing
of the product.”
Featured image credit: Shutterstock