Testing the Immunity of the Firearm Industry to Tort Litigation

Area of Science:

• Law and Social Sciences
• Public Health Policy
• Firearms Regulation

Background:

• Congressional inaction on assault weapons bans necessitates alternative regulatory strategies.
• Tort litigation is explored as a means to address the use of assault weapons in mass shootings.
• The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) of 2005 grants broad immunity to the firearm industry, complicating litigation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To review the history of tort litigation against the firearm industry.
• To outline the specific claims brought by the families of victims of the 2012 Newtown, Connecticut school shooting.
• To describe the trial court's decision in the Newtown case and the implications for future litigation.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of historical tort litigation trends concerning firearm manufacturers and sellers.
• Examination of the legal arguments presented in the Newtown families' lawsuit, including negligence and deceptive marketing.
• Review of the trial court's legal reasoning for dismissing the case.

Main Results:

• Opportunities for successful tort claims against the firearm industry are significantly limited by the PLCAA.
• The Newtown lawsuit, alleging negligence and deceptive marketing against the makers and sellers of the assault rifle used, was dismissed by the trial court on October 14, 2016.
• Plaintiffs in the Newtown case intend to appeal the trial court's decision.

Conclusions:

• Tort litigation, while an alternative strategy, faces substantial legal hurdles due to existing federal legislation.
• The Newtown case highlights the challenges plaintiffs face in overcoming the PLCAA's protections.
• The outcome of the appeal in the Newtown case could significantly impact future attempts at firearm litigation.