Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, a significant case before the U.S. Supreme Court, could have broad implications for industries facing litigation over product-related harms. Hillel Y. Levin, a Smith Professor at the University of Georgia School of Law, is closely following the case and has provided insights into its potential consequences.
Levin emphasizes the importance of how proximate cause is interpreted in this context: "I urge the U.S. Supreme Court not to adopt the defendants’ interpretation of proximate cause as it would radically redefine this concept. Doing so would have far-reaching and unpredictable consequences and could potentially make it impossible to hold industries accountable for their harms caused by their products."
The lawsuit was initiated by the Mexican government against firearms manufacturers, claiming that their distribution practices aid unlawful diversion of firearms into black markets and ultimately contribute to violence in Mexico. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit allowed the case to proceed, but the defendants have appealed to the Supreme Court.
Two primary issues are under consideration: whether Mexico's claims amount to aiding and abetting if proven, and whether the manufacturers' actions can be deemed a proximate cause of violence in Mexico if substantiated. A ruling in favor of either argument by the defendants would result in dismissal.
Levin notes that this case holds substantial implications due to past legal precedents involving firearms manufacturers and sellers who were largely shielded from liability by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). However, PLCAA includes a "predicate exception," which permits lawsuits if there's a violation of state or local statutes related to firearm sales or marketing that leads to harm.
Mexico argues that Smith & Wesson violated such statutes through aiding and abetting practices, thus contributing to cartel violence. If successful, this could lead to more lawsuits against firearm companies. Conversely, a ruling favoring defendants might prevent similar future lawsuits across various industries.
A scholars' amicus brief co-authored by Levin seeks to clarify interpretations of PLCAA’s predicate exception and common law principles on proximate causation for the court's consideration.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on March 4, 2025.