Conn. High Court Ruling Clears Way For Sandy Hook Families To Sue Gun Manufacturer Over Wrongful Marketing
In the lawsuit, the Sandy Hook families seized upon the marketing for the AR-15-style Bushmaster used in the 2012 attack, which invoked the violence of combat and used slogans like “Consider your man card reissued.” Lawyers for the families argued that those messages reflected a deliberate effort to appeal to troubled young men like Adam Lanza. The court found that sweeping federal protections for gunmakers did not prevent the families from bringing a lawsuit based on wrongful marketing claims.
The New York Times:
Sandy Hook Massacre: Remington And Other Gun Companies Lose Major Ruling Over Liability
The Connecticut Supreme Court dealt a major blow to the firearms industry on Thursday, clearing the way for a lawsuit against the companies that manufactured and sold the semiautomatic rifle used by the gunman in the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The lawsuit mounted a direct challenge to the immunity that Congress granted gun companies to shield them from litigation when their weapons are used in a crime. The ruling allows the case, brought by victims’ families, to maneuver around the federal shield, creating a potential opening to bring claims to trial and hold the companies, including Remington, which made the rifle, liable for the attack. (Rojas and Hussey, 3/14)
The Associated Press:
Court Rules Gun Maker Can Be Sued Over Newtown Shooting
In a 4-3 decision, justices reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit against Remington and overturned the ruling of a lower court judge, who said the entire lawsuit was prohibited by the 2005 federal law. The majority said that while most of the lawsuit's claims were barred by the federal law, Remington could still be sued for alleged wrongful marketing under Connecticut law. "The regulation of advertising that threatens the public's health, safety, and morals has long been considered a core exercise of the states' police powers," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority, adding he didn't believe Congress envisioned complete immunity for gun-makers. (3/14)
The Wall Street Journal:
Manufacturer Of AR-15 Can Be Sued Over Sandy Hook Massacre, Court Rules
The plaintiffs alleged that Remington unlawfully promoted the rifle to young, civilian men as a weapon with awesome power and ideal for combat. A representative for Remington didn’t respond to requests for comment. Remington had argued the claims were barred by a 2005 federal law that grants the gun industry expansive immunity from liability claims over gun violence. That law, however, has an exception, under which manufacturers may be liable for injuries resulting from violations of state laws dealing with the marketing of their products. (Gershman and McWhirter, 3/14)
The Washington Post:
Families Of Sandy Hook Shooting Victims Can Sue Gunmaker Remington Over 2012 Attack, Court Says
The court’s decision was narrow, with the liability for gunmakers based on how they advertise their weapons rather than on the sale of them to third parties who then commit horrible crimes. In its ruling, the court said companies that market military-style guns to civilians as a way of killing enemies could be violating state fair trade laws. (Barbash, 3/14)
The Washington Post:
‘Our Friends Are Dying, So We March’: Students Rally To Fight Gun Violence
On Thursday morning, a curious scene emerged on Pennsylvania Avenue: Between the throngs of tourists snapping photos of the Washington Monument and commuters rushing to work, high school students pushed their way toward the White House. At 9 a.m., hundreds of teenagers from the District and suburban Maryland and Northern Virginia left their classrooms and headed to the U.S. Capitol to protest gun violence. “No more!” students chanted while holding signs that read, “I should be writing my college essay, not my will” and “Am I next?” (Smith, 3/14)
