Latest news with #Smith&WessonBrands
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. Announces Rescheduling of Fourth Quarter and Full Fiscal 2025 Financial Release and Conference Call
Maryville, Tennessee--(Newsfile Corp. - June 6, 2025) - Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ: SWBI), a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design, today announced that the conference call to discuss its fourth quarter and full fiscal 2025 financial and operational results, which was originally scheduled for June 19, 2025, has been rescheduled for Wednesday, June 18, 2025. The conference call and webcast will begin at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (2:00 p.m. Pacific Time). Interested parties in North America are invited to participate by dialing 1-877-704-4453. Interested parties from outside North America are invited to participate by dialing 1-201-389-0920. Participants should dial in at least 10 minutes prior to the start of the call. A live and archived webcast of the event will be available on the company's website at under the Investor Relations section. About Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ: SWBI) is a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design, delivering a broad portfolio of quality handgun, long gun, and suppressor products to the global consumer and professional markets under the iconic Smith & Wesson® and Gemtech® brands. The company also provides forging and machining services to third parties. For more information call (844) 363-5386 or visit Contact: investorrelations@ 747-3448 To view the source version of this press release, please visit Sign in to access your portfolio
The Herald Scotland
3 days ago
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Supreme Court rules Mexico can't sue US gunmakers over cartel violence
"An action cannot be brought against a manufacturer if, like Mexico's, it is founded on a third-party's criminal use of the company's product," Justice Elena Kagan wrote. The decision landed against a backdrop of strained diplomatic relations between the United States and Mexico. President Donald Trump wants Mexico to do more to stop illegal drugs from flowing into the United States and Mexico wants to stop illegal arms from flowing south. Mexico has maintained tighter regulations on firearms than its neighbor to the north. The case was also the first time the Supreme Court ruled on a 2005 law that shields gunmakers from liability for crimes committed by third parties. An exception in the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act allows suits if a gunmaker is accused of knowingly violating a state or federal law. Attorneys representing Mexico argued that gun companies are "aiding and abetting" the trafficking of hundreds of thousands of high-powered firearms into Mexico through deliberate design, marketing and distribution choices. That includes doing business with dealers who repeatedly sell large quantities of guns to cartel traffickers, Mexico's counsel alleged. Firearms makers, led by Smith & Wesson Brands, said the chain of events between the manufacture of a gun and the harm it causes after being sold, transported, and used to commit crime in Mexico involves too many steps to blame the industry. Guns made in the United States are sold to federally licensed distributors who sell them to federally licensed dealers - some of whom knowingly or negligently sell them to criminals who smuggle them into Mexico, where they end up in the hands of cartel members. Mexico's attorneys stressed that the suit was in its early stages and said Mexico should be allowed a chance to prove its allegations in court. A federal judge in Massachusetts dismissed the suit, ruling it was barred by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms. But the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the challenge met an exception in the law and could move forward. Mexico, it said, had adequately alleged the gunmakers "aided and abetted the knowingly unlawful downstream trafficking of their guns into Mexico." Mexico was seeking an unspecified amount of monetary damages, estimated in the range of $10 billion, and a court order requiring gun companies to change their practices. Lawyers for gun rights groups told the Supreme Court that Mexico's suit is an attempt to bankrupt the American firearms industry and undermine the Second Amendment. Gun violence prevention groups worried the case could make it harder to bring domestic lawsuits against the gun industry. The case is Smith & Wesson Brands Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. Fourth Quarter and Full Fiscal 2025 Financial Release and Conference Call Alert
Maryville, Tennessee--(Newsfile Corp. - June 5, 2025) - Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ: SWBI), a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design, today announced it plans to release its fourth quarter and full fiscal 2025 financial results on Thursday, June 19, 2025, after the close of the market. The full text of the press release will be available on the Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. web site at under the Investor Relations section. The company will host a conference call and webcast on June 19, 2025 to discuss its fourth quarter and full fiscal 2025 financial and operational results. Speakers on the conference call will include Mark Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Deana McPherson, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. The conference call may include forward-looking statements. The conference call and webcast will begin at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (2:00 p.m. Pacific Time). Interested parties in North America are invited to participate by dialing 1-877-704-4453. Interested parties from outside North America are invited to participate by dialing 1-201-389-0920. Participants should dial in at least 10 minutes prior to the start of the call. A live and archived webcast of the event will be available on the company's website at under the Investor Relations section. About Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ: SWBI) is a U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design, delivering a broad portfolio of quality handgun, long gun, and suppressor products to the global consumer and professional markets under the iconic Smith & Wesson® and Gemtech® brands. The company also provides forging and machining services to third parties. For more information call (844) 363-5386 or visit Contact: investorrelations@ 747-3448 To view the source version of this press release, please visit
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
On a big decision day, the Supreme Court sent a message about unity
Supreme Court justices sent a message to the American public on Thursday: We're not as divided as you think. Of the six rulings that were released, four were unanimous, including the opinions in high-profile battles over reverse discrimination and faith-based tax breaks. Another decision was nearly unanimous, with just one justice peeling away on one part of the ruling. And the sixth decision had just one dissent, meaning that nearly all of the justices agreed with the plan to dismiss the case as 'improvidently granted.' Here's an overview of the six rulings released on Thursday — and a look at what's still to come from the Supreme Court in June. Ruling: Unanimous In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, the court was considering whether members of a majority group, such as straight, white males, should have to meet a higher burden of proof in order to make an employment discrimination claim. The case was brought by Marlean Ames, a straight, white woman, who accused her former employer of privileging LGBTQ employees during the promotion process. Ames lost in front of lower courts, but the Supreme Court overturned those decisions on Thursday. The justices unanimously said that members of majority groups should not have to meet a higher burden of proof and sent Ames' case back to the lower courts for reconsideration. The question in this case is whether ... a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must also show 'background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.' We hold that this additional 'background circumstances' requirement is not consistent with Title VII's text or our case law construing the statute," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in the opinion. Ruling: Unanimous In Smith & Wesson Brands v. Mexico, the court was asked to determine whether the Mexican government could sue seven gun manufacturers based in the U.S. over their role in unlawful gun sales in Mexico. The Supreme Court unanimously said on Thursday that the Mexican government's lawsuit cannot move forward 'because Mexico's complaint does not plausibly allege that the defendant gun manufacturers aided and abetted gun dealers' unlawful sales of firearms to Mexican traffickers.' 'We have little doubt that, as the complaint asserts, some such sales take place — and that the manufacturers know they do. But still, Mexico has not adequately pleaded what it needs to: that the manufacturers 'participate in' those sales 'as in something that (they) wish to bring about,'' Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the opinion. Ruling: Unanimous In Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the state of Wisconsin was violating the First Amendment's religious freedom protections by denying a faith-based tax break to a group of Catholic nonprofits. The nonprofits said their service to people in need was clearly motivated by Catholic teachings, but Wisconsin officials said they didn't qualify for the religious exemption to the state's unemployment tax because they did not seek to serve only Catholics or evangelize to their clients, as the Deseret News previously reported. State officials won in front of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which said that the Catholic nonprofits' work did not serve 'primarily religious purposes.' In Thursday's unanimous decision, the Supreme Court reversed that decision, ruling that Wisconsin was violating the First Amendment by privileging certain religious beliefs and actions over others. 'It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain 'neutrality between religion and religion.' There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one,' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the opinion. Ruling: Unanimous In CC/Devas (Mauritius) v. Antrix, the justices were considering under what circumstances federal courts in the U.S. can assert jurisdiction over foreign states. The case stemmed from a conflict between a company that's active in the U.S. and a corporation owned by India. The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously ruled that federal courts did have jurisdiction over India in this dispute and reversed a decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion. Ruling: Nearly unanimous, with one justice taking issue with one part of the majority opinion. In Blom Bank v. Honickman, the court was considering whether victims of terrorist attacks or their surviving family members could reopen their case against a bank that had allegedly aided and abetted terrorists by providing financial services. The Supreme Court ruled that the people who brought the case did not meet the high standard that must be cleared to reopen the case. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, was nearly unanimous. Eight of the justices, including Thomas, joined it in full, but Jackson only joined it in part. Ruling: Dismissed as improvidently granted, with one justice dissenting to the dismissal In Lab Corp v. Davis, the justices were considering whether a federal court can certify a class action suit if some of the parties in the suit lack legal standing. A majority of the justices decided to dismiss the case as improvidently granted, meaning that they felt the court should never have agreed to weigh in. Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented to that decision, writing that he felt it was possible — and would be valuable — to rule on the case. The Supreme Court will release around two dozen more rulings throughout the month of June as it works to wrap up its 2024-25 term by early July. The justices have yet to announce their decision in four of the five cases that the Deseret News highlighted in its list of this term's highest profile battles. The Supreme Court's next decision day has not yet been announced, but it will likely be Thursday, June 12.
USA Today
4 days ago
- Business
- USA Today
Supreme Court rules Mexico can't sue US gunmakers over cartel violence
Supreme Court rules Mexico can't sue US gunmakers over cartel violence Show Caption Hide Caption Mexico takes on American gun companies at Supreme Court Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism as Mexico attempted to hold American gun companies responsible for drug cartel violence. WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on June 5 rejected Mexico's attempt to hold U.S. gunmakers liable for violence and atrocities Mexican drug cartels have inflicted using their weapons. The court unanimously ruled that firearms makers are protected by a federal law barring certain lawsuits against them. "An action cannot be brought against a manufacturer if, like Mexico's, it is founded on a third-party's criminal use of the company's product," Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court. The decision landed against a backdrop of strained diplomatic relations between the United States and Mexico. President Donald Trump wants Mexico to do more to stop illegal drugs from flowing into the United States and Mexico wants to stop illegal arms from flowing south. Mexico has maintained tighter regulations on firearms than its neighbor to the north. The case was also the first time the Supreme Court ruled on a 2005 law that shields gunmakers from liability for crimes committed by third parties. An exception in the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act allows suits if a gunmaker is accused of knowingly violating a state or federal law. Attorneys representing Mexico argued that gun companies are 'aiding and abetting' the trafficking of hundreds of thousands of high-powered firearms into Mexico through deliberate design, marketing and distribution choices. That includes doing business with dealers who repeatedly sell large quantities of guns to cartel traffickers, Mexico's counsel alleged. Firearms makers, led by Smith & Wesson Brands, said the chain of events between the manufacture of a gun and the harm it causes after being sold, transported, and used to commit crime in Mexico involves too many steps to blame the industry. Guns made in the United States are sold to federally licensed distributors who sell them to federally licensed dealers – some of whom knowingly or negligently sell them to criminals who smuggle them into Mexico, where they end up in the hands of cartel members. What the Trump administration means for you: Sign up for USA TODAY's On Politics newsletter. Mexico's attorneys stressed that the suit was in its early stages and said Mexico should be allowed a chance to prove its allegations in court. A federal judge in Massachusetts dismissed the suit, ruling it was barred by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms. But the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the challenge met an exception in the law and could move forward. Mexico, it said, had adequately alleged the gunmakers 'aided and abetted the knowingly unlawful downstream trafficking of their guns into Mexico.' The Supreme Court disagreed, saying Mexico's lawsuit "closely resembles" the type of challenges Congress was trying to prevent. If Mexico's suit meets the exceptions in the law, that would "swallow most of the rule," Kagan wrote. Mexico was seeking an unspecified amount of monetary damages, estimated in the range of $10 billion, and a court order requiring gun companies to change their practices. Lawyers for gun rights groups told the Supreme Court that Mexico's suit is an attempt to bankrupt the American firearms industry and undermine the Second Amendment. Gun violence prevention groups worried the case could make it harder to bring domestic lawsuits against the gun industry. David Pucino, legal director at GIFFORDS Law Center, said after the decision that the Supreme Court may have ended Mexico's lawsuit but 'the justices did not give the gun industry the broad immunity it sought.' Pucino said the decision 'does not affect our ability an resolve to hold those who break the law accountable.' The case is Smith & Wesson Brands Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
