And if it never takes root there, it's likely to pop up in Chicago.
"If it got planted in Connecticut, and it flowers in Uvalde, that might be enough. "You only need one or two lawsuits to win to transform the whole industry," Lytton says. "Trying to sue a firearm manufacturer for the crimes committed by a remote third party would be the same thing as trying to sue Ford and Anheuser-Busch for the deaths caused by drunk driving," Oliva says.Įven if the Uvalde cases clears the stringent immunity law and are allowed a trial, the courts would still have to consider another set of thorny questions, like whether the company's marketing is protected by the first amendment.īut Lytton says whatever happens, these liability cases put more focus on gunmakers. Mark Oliva is managing director of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearms industry.
The cases have been filed in federal court in Texas, with the help of Everytown Law, an arm of the group Everytown for Gun Safety.ĭaniel Defense didn't respond to an interview request, but has called the lawsuit politically-motivated and legally unfounded. As a result, the Uvalde lawsuits against Daniel Defense could be the biggest test yet of the extent of the firearms industry's liability protections. One big question is whether violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act even apply to the exceptions allowed under that sweeping immunity law. So while gun control supporters cheered the settlement, the litigation left many legal questions unresolved. Supreme Court declined to take up the case on appeal.
0 kommentar(er)
