Elect Trump they said,.... he'll nominate 2A friendly SCOTUS justices they said,...... LMAO
Once again we rely on 9 robed swamp members to tell us what the original documents say. As if we can’t actually read. Eventually jury nullification and USSC nullification will rule the day. If enough people ignore them, their power becomes zero.
JR, as I read it, "You are 100% Correct."
The only thing the case can decide is whether the advertising was improper. That "Man card" stuff may be over the line but they would have to prove that the shooter even saw it.
From the comments:
There are some inherent problems with the article, as in misstatements, or misunderstandings about PLACA.
“Sandy Hook parents and one survivor are suing Remington for “
negligent marketing”
under Connecticut’s unfair trade practices law, in direct violation of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.”
– – In what way does the narrow path allowed by Connecticut’s SC violate PLACA? We only have the assertion that it does, and a link to another article that does not actually support the above claim.
“It does not get much more frivolous than suing suing Remington for “negligently marketing” the rifle…And the Supreme Court — including those wonderful pro-2A Trump appointees — is allowing that case to proceed.”
– – “Where’s the Beef?” PLACA provides an exception to its protections in the clause that allows legal action to proceed against gun manufacturers (or any one else involved in the industry) who break a law “applicable to the sale or marketing of the [firearm or ammunition], and there by causing the plaintiffs injuries.” Such claim has been made, and SCOTUS cannot arbitrarily decide that such a claim is frivolous on its face simply because PLACA is cited.
The upshot is that the application of the PLACA exception (or any other law regarding sales and advertising) isn’t “ripe” for SCOTUS review; no actual adjudication of the facts has issued. SCOTUS cannot review a decision of a lower court that has not yet happened (the actual application of the exceptions to PLACA in the instance at hand).
Is the SCOTUS denial of cert important? Yes. Is it more important than we think? Not actually. It is only one artifact in the course of a liability claim that has not yet reached a conclusion. Is the denial of cert a tactical/strategic move on the part of SCOTUS? Maybe. The NY transport case is pending, and that ruling could possibly affect a number of 2A cases currently in the courts. Thus, SCOTUS, rather than taking on several contemporary cases individually, maybe reserving its prerogative to use the NY case to settle the hash in a collection of cases active in the lower courts.
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/why-the-remington-case-cert-denial-matters-more-than-you-think/