NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, praised the San Diego County Superior Court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Smith & Wesson, Inc. under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). The court decided Tuesday that Smith & Wesson, Inc. is not responsible for the horrendous criminal acts committed by a deranged murderer at the Chabad of Poway, in Poway, Calif., on April 27, 2019.

The PLCAA protects the firearm industry from frivolous lawsuits that attempt to hold firearm businesses liable for the criminal misuse of lawfully sold firearms.

“We are heartened by the court’s decision today correctly interpreting the PLCAA and ruling in favor of Smith & Wesson, Inc. that the criminal liability for the horrific actions of a murderer are the sole responsibility of that individual,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Plaintiffs in this case attempted to hold Smith & Wesson, Inc. responsible for these horrific crimes by alleging that because the firearm could be illegally modified, the company violated federal law. Additionally, plaintiffs alleged Smith & Wesson, Inc.’s advertising caused the murderer to commit his violent crimes. The firearm industry is grateful that the judge found these claims lack legal merit and correctly granted judgment in favor of Smith & Wesson, Inc.”

NSSF earlier in the case filed an amicus brief in support of Smith & Wesson, Inc.

The murderer in this incident was convicted and sentenced by a California state court to life in prison, without the possibility of parole. The sentence carried an additional 121 years to life, plus 16 years as part of a plea agreement. The murderer was also convicted by a federal court and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, plus 30 years.

The PLCAA was signed into law in 2005 by President George W. Bush with broad bipartisan support by Congress. The law was spurred by numerous frivolous lawsuits orchestrated by gun control groups to circumvent Congress and put firearm companies out of business based on the criminal misuse of firearm by remote individuals who lack respect for both life and law. The PLCAA has been repeatedly upheld as Constitutional by federal courts.

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners in a long-running challenge of California’s restrictive gun control policies regarding gun shows have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review in a case known as B&L Productions, Inc. v. Newsom.

SAF is joined by the California Rifle & Pistol Association, South Bay Rod & Gun Club, Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association, Second Amendment Law Center, L.A.X. Firing Range, B&L Productions—for whom the case is named—and several private citizens. They are represented by attorneys Donald Kilmer at Kilmer Law Offices in Caldwell, Idaho, and C.D. Michel, Anna M. Barvir and Tiffany D. Cheuvront at Michel & Associates in Long Beach, California.

The case involves questions about First and Second Amendment rights, and whether the state can adopt laws and policies which abridge and impair those rights.

“We are at a point where California has essentially ignored the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2022 that eliminated the use of ‘judicial balancing tests’ when deciding Second Amendment claims,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “while trampling on the First Amendment protections of speech which is necessary for the commerce of lawful products.” Read more

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that it has filed a new federal lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania’s law banning 18-20-year-olds from applying for Licenses to Carry Firearms (LTCFs). FPC is joined in the litigation by two FPC members and the National Rifle Association (NRA). The lawsuit, styled Young v. Ott, comes as the Third Circuit is considering an FPC lawsuit challenging another one of the state’s age-based carry bans. The complaint can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/young.

“On their eighteenth birthday, the Plaintiffs in this case became legal adults for almost all purposes and certainly for the purpose of exercising their other constitutionally protected rights. They can vote, enter into contracts, and get married. They can join the military to fight and die for their country. And as adults, there are no parents or other legal guardians legally responsible for their care and protection. Yet, the laws challenged in this case prevent Plaintiffs from exercising their Second Amendment protected rights on par with all other law-abiding adult Americans,” the complaint states.

“Governments like Pennsylvania cannot deny the right to bear arms to otherwise eligible legal adults. We are proud to join forces with the NRA in this important case and look forward to eliminating these unconstitutional age-based bans throughout the United States,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

The Young case is part of FPC’s high-impact strategic litigation program, FPC Law, aimed at eliminating immoral laws and creating a world of maximal liberty. FPC thanks FPC Action Foundation for its strategic support of this FPC Law case. For more on FPC’s lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, X (Twitter), Facebook, and YouTube. Individuals who want to support FPC’s work to eliminate unconstitutional laws can join the FPC Grassroots Army at JoinFPC.org or make a donation at firearmspolicy.org/donate. Read more

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that it has filed its opening brief with the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Cheeseman v. Platkin, its lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” The brief can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/cheeseman.

Earlier this year, the district court held that New Jersey’s ban was unconstitutional “as to the Colt AR-15 for use of self-defense within the home” but left the rest of the restrictions in place. Both sides appealed the court’s ruling.

“The principles established by Heller and confirmed by Bruen should make this a straightforward case,” argues the brief. “The paradigmatic semiautomatic firearm banned by New Jersey is the AR-15 platform rifle. Thirty years ago, the Supreme Court described the AR-15 as a ‘civilian,’ ‘commonplace,’ ‘generally available,’ and ‘traditionally … lawful’ firearm. It remains ‘commonly available,’ and according to the agency charged with administering the Nation’s firearms laws it is ‘one of the most popular firearms in the United States.’” Read more

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, celebrated the announcement that a lawsuit has been filed against Maine’s Attorney General Aaron Frey, seeking declarative and injunctive relief from state authorities enforcing Public Law 2023, Chapter 678, Maine’s new 72-hour waiting period law that denies law-abiding Mainers the ability to take possession of a newly-purchased firearm after they pass an FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) verification. The Plaintiffs have moved for a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of the law while the challenge is ongoing.

The 72-hour waiting period law was included in a larger gun control package that was enacted by Gov. Janet Mills in August. Several plaintiffs are challenging Maine’s 72-hour delay period by demonstrating that it violates their Second Amendment rights and are asking the court to strike down the law as unconstitutional.

The lawsuit against Attorney General Aaron Frey was filed by several individuals, federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs), and an organization that provides firearm training. One of the plaintiffs is a domestic-abuse survivor and certified firearm instructor who offers self-defense classes to victims and survivors. The law now prevents the women she assists from adequately defending themselves against abusive partners who pose a credible and imminent threat to their physical safety, as it forces them to wait three days to secure a firearm even when they clear the NICS background check. Likewise, another plaintiff—a federally licensed firearm dealer—has been forced to delay sales to qualified individuals with time-sensitive needs, including a single woman who was being stalked and a married couple whose home was burgled. These stories are emblematic of the countless number of individuals whose rights have been denied and whose safety has been put in jeopardy due to Maine’s 72-hour waiting period. Read more

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, is urging President-elect Donald Trump to take decisive action to disband the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention and put an end to government-funded efforts to infringe upon the Constitutionally-guaranteed Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. This office, installed under President Joe Biden, never addressed criminal misuse of firearms. Instead, it squandered taxpayer dollars and employed former gun control lobbyists to minimize the American rights to keep and bear arms and propose policies to harass and damage the American firearm and ammunition industry.

President-elect Trump might consider replacing this office with one dedicated to the advancement and preservation of the Second Amendment.

“President-elect Trump has the ability to stand strong with law-abiding Second Amendment supporters and wipe away this unprecedented abuse of government authority that has been used as a blunt instrument against rights that are protected by the U.S. Constitution,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President & General Counsel “Nowhere else, within the U.S. Government, are taxpayers forced to fund efforts to denigrate their rights protected by the law. This office was established to appease the special-interest gun control lobby and donors The Biden-Harris administration has used this office to attempt to justify their unconstitutional and whole-of-government attacks on Second Amendment rights and the industry that makes those rights possible to exercise. This office must no longer exist after January 20, 2025.”

The Biden-Harris administration established The White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention in September 2023 under the direct supervision of Vice President Kamala Harris as the “gun control czar.” From this office, the Biden-Harris administration promulgated policy positions that are egregiously counter to the rights of law-abiding citizens. Staffed by Stefanie Feldman as Director, she once boasted on X that President Biden would defeat firearm manufacturers that he once labelled “the enemy” by overturning the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act (PLCAA). She posted, “As president, he’ll defeat them again. And, he’ll repeal the non-sensical liability protection for gun manufacturers.” Read more