Case: National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc., et al. v. Letitia James, Attorney General of New York, No. 25-1026
Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2026-02-26
Status: Pending
Question Presented: Whether the PLCAA's predicate exception allows parties to bring the same common-law-style suits against firearms industry members that Congress enacted the PLCAA to prohibit, so long as states codify those general common-law principles in a statute that applies to commerce in arms.
On February 20, 2026, the National Shooting Sports Foundation and co-petitioners filed a petition for certiorari, represented by Erin E. Murphy, asking the Court to take up a question that has divided lower courts: whether states may effectively nullify the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act by enacting statutes that replicate common-law tort theories Congress intended to foreclose.
The PLCAA, enacted in 2005, broadly immunizes firearms manufacturers and sellers from civil liability when third parties misuse their products. The statute contains a “predicate exception,” however, permitting suits where a defendant violates a “statute applicable to the sale or marketing of” firearms. New York enacted legislation codifying public nuisance and negligent entrustment principles specifically directed at the arms trade. The Second Circuit held that New York’s statute qualifies as a predicate, allowing suits to proceed.
The question presented goes to the heart of statutory construction: does “statute applicable to the sale or marketing” of firearms encompass any state law touching arms commerce, or only statutes imposing specific regulatory requirements beyond what common law already provides? If the former reading prevails, states hold a straightforward template for circumventing federal immunity. The petition signals that the firearms industry views the Second Circuit’s interpretation as an open invitation for legislative workarounds nationwide.
The practical stakes are considerable. Several states have enacted or are considering similar statutes modeled on New York’s approach. A cert grant would give the Court an opportunity to define the outer boundary of the predicate exception and clarify how much room Congress left for state experimentation within a federal immunity framework. With no amicus filings yet and a response due March 30, 2026, the case remains in its earliest stages.