Supreme Court rules in favor of U.S. gun makers in Mexico's lawsuit
June 5 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Thursday against a lawsuit filed by Mexico that accuses seven American gun manufacturers and one wholesaler of unlawful sale practices, and arming drug dealers.
"The question presented is whether Mexico's complaint plausibly pleads that conduct. We conclude it does not," wrote Justice Elena Kagan in the opinion of the court.
Mexico filed suit in March against a group of companies that includes Smith & Wesson, Beretta, Colt and Glock, alleging that the defendants violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA, which can allow for some lawsuits against the makers and sellers of firearms.
As stated in the case document, Mexico purports the accused companies "aided and abetted unlawful gun sales that routed firearms to Mexican drug cartels," and failed to exercise "reasonable care" to keep their guns from being trafficked into Mexico.
Kagan explained that it falls on the plaintiff in this case to properly show that the defendant companies directly committed violations of PLCAA, or otherwise "the predicate violation opens a path to making a gun manufacturer civilly liable for the way a third party has used the weapon it made."
Kagan did include that "Mexico has a severe gun violence problem, which its government views as coming from north of the border." She added that the country has only a single gun store, which is slightly inaccurate as Mexico currently has two, but in regard of the one store she mentioned, Kagan claimed that it "issues fewer than 50 gun permits each year."
She also purported gun traffickers can purchase weaponry in the United States, often illegally, and then take those guns to drug cartels in Mexico. Kagan further noted that as per the Mexican government, "as many as 90% of the guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico originated in the United States."
Nonetheless, the court ruled "that Mexico has not plausibly alleged aiding and abetting on the manufacturers' part." This is why, Kagan explained, that the defendant companies are immune under the PLCAA.
In a concurring statement, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court's opinion hasn't resolved what exactly a future plaintiff will have to show to prove a defendant has committed a PLCAA violation, and that Mexico hadn't "adequately pleaded its theory of the case."
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also included a concurring statement that Congress passed PLCAA in order to decide "which duties to impose on the firearms industry," and that ignoring PLCAA's set reasons that do "authorize lawsuits like the one Mexico filed here" would twist PLCAA's main purpose.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
America's nuclear energy moment is here — let's seize it
In 1960, Dr. Glenn Seaborg, then-chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, confidently predicted that nuclear energy would power half of American homes by the year 2000. For a while, it looked like he might be right. Between 1967 and 1974, U.S. utilities ordered nearly 200 nuclear reactors. But momentum stalled as cost overruns, regulatory hurdles, slowing demand and accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and later Fukushima eroded public confidence. Projects were canceled, and the nation's once-robust nuclear manufacturing base faded. Today, it seems like Seaborg's prediction wasn't wrong — just too early. A new generation of nuclear reactors — with advanced designs that safely cool and shut down reactors without the need for power or operator intervention — has made such accidents virtually impossible. Meanwhile, soaring electricity demand, driven by artificial intelligence, and rising geopolitical risks have underscored the need for energy that is clean, safe, reliable and abundant — four boxes that only nuclear energy checks. I have witnessed nuclear's resurgence firsthand in my role at the engineering and construction firm Bechtel. We successfully helped bring Georgia Power's two new reactors online in 2023 and 2024, and are currently working to deliver nuclear projects in Tennessee and Wyoming. Overseas, we're helping Poland build its first nuclear plant — a reminder that U.S. nuclear leadership also expands our geopolitical influence, rather than ceding it to Russia and China. Fortunately, the Trump administration understands the stakes and has issued executive orders aimed at quadrupling domestic nuclear capacity by 2050. With its sights set on a true nuclear renaissance, the government — together with the nuclear industry — should focus on clearing the four biggest hurdles in nuclear's path. First, we must confront the elephant in the room: cost. Critics who say nuclear energy is too expensive underestimate both its long-term value and American ingenuity. A nuclear plant's low operating costs and long lifespan make the cost per unit of energy highly competitive. Meanwhile, each new project helps technology developers and utilities standardize reactors, enabling builders like Bechtel to standardize engineering designs, scale supply chains and deploy new construction methods such as digital execution and modularization. The result is shorter schedules, lower costs and greater certainty of outcome. Controlling cost is also about reducing 'project execution' risk for investors. If we want to expand nuclear energy and unlock efficiency gains, we will need more help from the government to assume some of the financial risk of first-mover projects. As the industry rebuilds its capability to deliver, new nuclear projects can be susceptible to delays and cost overruns that deter investors. To stimulate the market, the government must absorb some of the early project cost overrun risks — just as other countries are already doing to grow their nuclear power output. Second, the U.S. should deliver on its obligation under law to establish a sustainable national program for permanently disposing of spent nuclear fuel. While today's storage methods are designed to work safely for 80 years or more, a long-term solution would resolve this challenge and strengthen public confidence in nuclear power. Third, regulators must continue modernizing. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in particular, plays an indispensable role in maintaining high industry standards and has made progress in updating its approach to approving projects. But the framework, built in the 1970s, lags behind the modular, standardized and inherently safer designs of today's nuclear reactors. Significant opportunities remain to streamline approvals without compromising safety. The Trump administration's new executive order encouraging the commission to reform is a welcome step in the right direction. Fourth, and perhaps most urgently, we need people. America is grappling with a skilled labor shortage, from welders to electricians and heavy equipment operators. Here, too, the administration can and is beginning to lead by incentivizing partnerships between industry and education and by expanding access to vocational training. We need to make sure that joining the construction trades is a rewarding, fulfilling and safe career. We need to reshape perceptions that you can only get ahead with a four-year degree, which is simply not true and even misleading to the younger generation. A national campaign should champion these careers as mission-driven, innovative and essential to America's future. There are no silver bullets in energy policy. Solar, gas and emerging technologies will all be part of the equation. But failing to realize the full potential of nuclear energy's promise would be a costly mistake — economically, environmentally and geopolitically. A strong U.S. nuclear program will produce more than megawatts. It will catalyze life-changing technologies, a robust national industrial base and a brighter future for generations. If we get it right, maybe someone in 2075 will look back at today as the moment when America glimpsed its energy moonshot and seized the opportunity to lead. Craig Albert is president and chief operating officer of the engineering and construction company Bechtel. He previously led its nuclear, security and environmental unit.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Rehab can keep you out of jail — but become a prison itself
Chris Koon didn't read the fine print. Sitting in the Cenikor Baton Rouge rehab center's intake office in 2015, flanked by his mom and grandmother, he signed where told. 'A lot of it read like legalese,' writes Shoshana Walter in 'Rehab: An American Scandal' (Simon & Schuster, Aug. 12). 'Incomprehensible but also innocuous, like something you might see before downloading an app on your phone.' Koon felt lucky. He wasn't going to prison. Just days earlier, he'd been arrested for meth possession. The alternative to five years in state prison? A brutal two-year Cenikor inpatient program. Koon took the deal. In signing the intake documents, he agreed to 'receive no monetary compensation' for work he did, with wages going 'directly back to the Foundation.' He signed away his right to workers' compensation if injured. He forfeited his food stamps, disability payments and any other government assistance. And he agreed to 'adopt appropriate morals and values as promoted by the program.' Koon's story isn't an outlier — it's a glimpse into what Walter calls 'America's other drug crisis.' While overdoses and opioid deaths dominate headlines, far less attention goes to the 'profit-hungry, under-regulated, and all too often deadly rehab industry,' writes Walter. Across the country, thousands of treatment programs are propped up by federal policies and rooted in a distinctly American blend of punishment and personal responsibility. People were 'lured to rehab with the promise of a cure for what ailed them,' Walter writes, 'only to repeatedly falter and fail inside a system that treated them like dollar signs.' The idea hard labor can cure someone isn't new. After the Civil War, US slavery was abolished except as punishment for a crime. That loophole became the foundation for a forced-labor system that conveyed newly freed black people into prisons and chain gangs. Over time, prison officials began marketing this arrangement as 'rehabilitation.' As Walter writes, this legacy has been repackaged for the modern drug crisis. The Affordable Care Act promised expanded treatment access through Medicaid. But the rehab industry that exploded in response was lightly regulated, profit-driven and increasingly dangerous. The result: thousands of people like Chris Koon, lured into treatment by courts, cops or family members, only to find themselves stuck in a system that looked less like therapy and more like punishment. They include women like April Lee, a black woman from Philadelphia. Despite growing up in addiction's long shadow — her mother died from AIDS when Lee was just a teenager, after years of selling sex to support a crack habit — Lee didn't start using drugs herself until after having her second child, when a doctor prescribed her Percocet for back pain. That opened the door to addiction. Child-welfare authorities eventually took her kids. Fellow users nicknamed her 'Mom' and 'Doc' for her uncanny ability to find usable veins, no matter how damaged. April Lee returned to her recovery house — as an unpaid house monitor. April Lee / ACLU She entered recovery in 2016. Every morning at 6, 18 women gathered in the dining room of one of two overcrowded houses to read from the Bible. Lee stayed 10 months. With nowhere else to go, she returned — this time as a house monitor, working without pay in exchange for a bed. 'She was still early into recovery, and she felt stressed by the intensity of the job,' Walter writes. 'On top of that, she wasn't getting a paycheck, so she couldn't save up money to leave.' 'Don't really know how to feel right now,' Lee wrote in her journal. 'The lady I work for — for free, mind you — wont me to watch over women witch mean I have to stay in every night.' She felt physically and emotionally trapped. 'I wanted to snap this morning. Miss my children so much.' Like so many others, Lee found herself stuck in the recovery-house loop — forced to work, unable to leave and earning nothing. She helped with chores, mainly cooking and cleaning. Residents' food stamps stocked the kitchen. Lee loved to cook, and she made comfort food for the house: mac and cheese, fried chicken, beef stew. But all the warmth she gave others couldn't buy her a way out. For others, like Koon, it was about more than just forced labor. During his first 30 days at Cenikor, the other patients policed each other. If one person broke a rule, the entire group might be punished with a 'fire drill' in the middle of the night. 'If anyone stepped out of line or did something wrong during the drill, they'd have to stay awake even longer,' Walter writes. Discipline was obsessive. In his first month, Koon sat in a classroom with about 30 other residents, most sent by courts like he was, reciting rules out loud, line by line. There were more than 100. 'He could get in trouble for not having a pen, not wearing a belt, for an untied shoelace, for leaving a book on the table, for his shirt coming untucked,' Walter details. Koon learned the punishment system fast. A common one was 'the verbal chair,' in which any participant could order him to sit, arms locked and knees at a 90-degree angle, and stare silently at the wall while others screamed at him. 'Go have a seat in the verbal chair. Think about having your shirt untucked,' they'd say. And Koon, like everyone else, was expected to respond, 'Thank you.' There were others. 'Mirror therapy,' where he'd stand and yell his failings at himself in the mirror. 'The dishpan,' where he'd be dressed in a neon-green shirt, scrubbing floors and dishes while loudly reciting the Cenikor philosophy, 'a paragraph-long diatribe about self-change,' Walter writes. And the dreaded 'verbal haircut,' when another resident, sometimes even a staff member, would berate him as part of his treatment. Dressed up as a therapeutic community, Koon thought instead, 'This is like a cult.' Walter believes he wasn't far off. Everyone was required to tattle. Koon had to turn in weekly at least 10 'pull-ups' — written reports detailing rule infractions committed by fellow residents. If he didn't, he could lose points and with them privileges like phone calls, family visits or permission to grow a mustache. Confrontations were public and ritualized: Residents would sit in a circle around one or two people forced to listen as everyone else denounced them. 'They took turns confronting that person, professing their faults and errors, while the person was permitted only to say 'thank you,'' Walter writes. Staff called it 'The Game.' He saw grown men cry. He heard women called bitches and sluts. He realized many employees were former participants enforcing the system that once broke them. Not everyone saw a problem. Many in the legal system embraced tough-love rehab programs, especially judges looking for alternatives to jail. One of Cenikor's biggest champions was Judge Larry Gist, who ran one of the first drug courts, in Jefferson County, Texas, in the 1990s. 'The vast majority of folks that I deal with are basically bottom-feeders,' Gist told the author. 'They've been losers since the day they were born.' Cenikor's extreme model was ideal for 'the right people,' he believed. Cenikor rewarded such loyalty, giving judges and lawmakers steak dinners served by participants and annual awards banquets, complete with gleaming, diamond-shaped trophies. Gist 'proudly displayed his' in 'his chambers, where he liked to host his happy hours with prosecutors and defense attorneys.' Koon was booted out of Cenikor after just two years, for faking a urine sample and contracting a contagious staph infection, but managed to stay sober on his own. He proposed to his childhood sweetheart, Paige, moving in with her two daughters, and finding the stability he'd been chasing for years. He went back to school to learn welding, and the daily rhythms of family life kept him grounded. 'He hasn't taken a drug recreationally for eight years,' Walter writes. Lee's path out took longer, and her recovery was, as Walter writes, 'in some ways a stroke of luck.' She left the house after landing a job at a law firm that helped women reunite with their children in foster care — a world away from the nights she'd once spent tricking at the Blue Moon Hotel but one that barely covered her bills and pushed her just over the poverty line, cutting off assistance. She earned her GED, took online college courses, regained custody of her kids and bought her own home by 2021. 'And yet many days she felt she was teetering on the edge, one crisis or unpaid bill away from making a terrible mistake,' Walter writes. That year, she returned to Kensington, where her addiction had once thrived, bringing fresh food and water to people still living on the streets. As for Cenikor, its time in the shadows ended, at least temporarily. Investigators found evidence of exploitation: residents forced to work without pay, unsafe housing conditions, staff-client relationships, even overdoses inside the facilities. The state of Texas fined Cenikor more than $1.4 million in 2019, but the agency struck a settlement, and it continued to operate. Koon and Lee don't represent everyone who's experienced addiction, treatment or recovery. But they do reflect a system that often promises far more than it delivers. 'When rehab works, it can save lives,' Walter writes. 'It can mend families and be among the most redemptive narrative arcs in a person's life.' But sometimes, rehab not only fails to help people, it actively harms them, recycling them through a gauntlet of relapse, shame and risk: 'Despite the rehab industry's many claims, there is no magical cure for addiction.'
Epoch Times
2 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Ghirardelli Made Life Better One Chocolate at a Time
In 1849, Domingo Ghirardelli arrived in California intending to earn his fortune as a gold prospector. It was an unusual enterprise for the Italian-born merchant, who had, up until that point, been mentored and skilled primarily in the confectionary and candy industries. He gambled on the promise of the wild American frontier—and it paid off. Ultimately, ground chocolate not gold bars would be the source of his prosperity. Despite setbacks that included a pair of devastating fires, Ghirardelli lived a deliciously successful story built on hard work, value, smarts, and reliability, and 175 years later, his surname is familiar worldwide. Life of an Adventuresome Chocolatier Son of a Genoese importer of spices and exotic foods, Domenico Ghirardelli (pronounced Gear-are-delly) was born in Rapallo, Italy, on Feb. 21, 1817. Giuseppe Ghirardelli exposed his son to a wide assortment of lively tastes, flavors, scents, and colors. Perhaps this early experience motivated him to learn the confectionary trade at a young age, apprenticing under a Genoese candymaker and chocolatier named Antonio Maria Romanengo.
