HYDE-SMITH, EZELL SIGN AMICUS BRIEF TO SCOTUS OPPOSING NEW YORK ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE FEDERAL FIREARMS LAW

HYDE-SMITH, EZELL SIGN AMICUS BRIEF TO SCOTUS OPPOSING NEW YORK ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE FEDERAL FIREARMS LAW

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) and U.S. Representative Mike Ezell (R-Miss.) are among 77 lawmakers who have signed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a Second Circuit ruling and uphold the Second Amendment by preventing New York from bypassing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

Signed by 22 U.S. Senators and 55 U.S. Representatives, the brief argues that a New York state public nuisance law improperly undermines protections established by Congress in the PLCAA, which generally shields gun manufacturers and sellers from lawsuits when criminals misuse firearms that were legally sold. The New York law allows lawsuits against gun industry members based on broad claims that they contributed to conditions endangering public safety.

"Our brief is part of the ongoing work to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens from leftist states run by anti-gun activists. These states shouldn't be allowed to erode the constitutional protections established by Congress by law," said Senator Hyde-Smith, author of the Gun-owner Registration Information Protection (GRIP) Act.

"Law-abiding Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and that right should not be undermined by backdoor attempts to target lawful manufacturers," said Congressman Ezell. "The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act ensures firearm manufacturers are not held liable for the criminal actions of others. Efforts to bypass that law threaten both the Second Amendment and the stability of an industry that supports American jobs and constitutional freedoms. I stand with my colleagues in urging the Supreme Court to uphold federal law and protect the rights of responsible gun owners."

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and U.S. Representative Russell Fry (R-S.C.) led the amicus brief, which supports the National Shooting Sports Foundation's petition seeking certiorari before the Supreme Court.

Read excerpts from the amicus brief below and the full brief here.

"The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures law-abiding and peaceable American citizens the right to keep and bear arms. But no one besides accomplished gunsmiths could exercise that right if a citizen could not lawfully purchase a firearm because the firearm industry had become insolvent. Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to prevent that outcome by placing firearm manufacturers on equal footing with other American manufacturers. Under the Act, so long as a firearm is properly made and properly transferred into commercial channels, a manufacturer is generally not liable if a criminal later misuses that firearm in the commission of a crime. In particular, the PLCAA forecloses the imposition of liability under flexible and indistinct common-law standards that provide firearm manufacturers with no notice of the precise conduct that is required or to be avoided. Indeed, that was the statute's core purpose.

"The State of New York is unhappy with any impediments to its ability to bankrupt lawful arms manufacturers based on the actions of New York criminals whom the State is unable or unwilling to control. In the State's view-adopted by the Second Circuit-the PLCAA is a paper tiger that any state legislature may tame by simply codifying vague and unpredictable common-law standards and explicitly applying the new code provisions only to the firearms industry.

"The State and the court below are too clever by half. This case presents an issue of exceptional importance with regard to the states' ability to circumvent the preemptive force of federal legislation. The PLCAA is not a mere Kabuki feint designed to encourage its own circumvention. Rather, the Act was designed to, and does, preempt efforts to impose hazy common-law liability standards whether or not codified by a state legislature to target the firearms industry. This Court should intervene now before the Second Circuit's decision, directly or through its influence, further undermines the Second Amendment and congressional will."

###