Smith & Wesson v. Mexico (SCOTUS Oral Argument)

#scotus #smithandwesson #potentiallycriminal
The United Mexican States (yes, that's the official name of Mexico) is attempting to sue multiple firearms manufacturers (Barrett, Glock, Colt, Ruger, Beretta, Smith & Wesson) on the premise that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) does not apply since the gun companies decided to "help" the drug cartels wreak havoc in Mexico (Seriously......yes they really think this).

The district court dismissed the case under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which generally bars suits against firearms companies based on criminals misusing their products. But the First Circuit reversed. It held that PLCAA does not bar this suit because Mexico stated a claim that defendants’ business practices have aided and abetted firearms trafficking to the cartels, proximately harming the Mexican government.

The issues before SCOTUS are:
1) Whether the production and sale of firearms in the United States is the proximate cause of alleged injuries to the Mexican government stemming from violence committed by drug cartels in Mexico

(2) Whether the production and sale of firearms in the United States amounts to “aiding and abetting” illegal firearms trafficking because firearms companies allegedly know that some of their products are unlawfully trafficked.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MERCH
*TeeSpring - https://potentiallycriminal.creator-spring.com

DONATE
*Venmo: sean-martin-462
*Zelle: potentiallycriminal@gmail.com

CONTACT
* Email - potentiallycriminal@gmail.com
* Actual Mail - PO Box 716, Willoughby, OH 44096

LINKS
*Locals - https://potentiallycriminal.locals.com
*Rumble - https://rumble.com/PotentiallyCriminal
*Odysee - https://odysee.com/@PotentiallyCriminal
*Twitch - https://www.twitch.tv/potentially_criminal
*Kick - https://kick.com/potentially-criminal
*BitChute - https://bitchute.com/potentially_criminal/
*Discord - https://discord.gg/636zWxxW
*Website - www.seanpmartinlaw.com

Nothing in the commentary or responses provided by Sean P. Martin, Esq., Martin Media LLC, or Martin Law Office LLC, expressly or implied, shall be deemed to be legal advice and shall not be construed as the creation of an attorney-client relationship in any way. The viewer has responsibility of obtaining legal advise from an competent and licensed attorney, and is urged to do so. Support of this channel or purchase of any affiliated products or services does not constitute the creation of an attorney-client relationship. Any opinions expressed herein are my own and do not reflect those of any organization, association or group.

All references or clips that may be used on this channel are for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hughes v. Benjamin, 437 F. Supp. 3d 382 (S.D.N.Y. 2020); Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).

Copyright Martin Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: https://streamyard.com/pal/d/5660283745075200