Gun Industry Challenges New York's Public Nuisance Law

NSSF argues law circumvents Congressional intent behind federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

Mar. 17, 2026 at 2:10am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review New York's public nuisance law, which the industry group argues attempts to evade the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) passed by Congress in 2005. NSSF contends the New York law creates a new civil action that would force 'gun industry members' to address criminals' misdeeds, despite the PLCAA's intent to prohibit such lawsuits.

Why it matters

The PLCAA was enacted to prevent frivolous lawsuits against the firearms industry based on the criminal actions of others. NSSF argues New York's law is an attempt to circumvent this federal law, which could set a precedent for other states to pass similar laws and undermine the PLCAA's protections.

The details

New York's public nuisance law allows the state to sue gun manufacturers and sellers over crimes committed with their products, even though the federal PLCAA was intended to shield the industry from such lawsuits. NSSF contends the New York law directly contradicts the PLCAA's purpose and the Supreme Court's previous rulings on the law's 'predicate exception' that allows a narrow subset of lawsuits.

  • In 2005, Congress passed the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which was signed into law by President George W. Bush.
  • In 2021, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruling allowed New York's public nuisance law to stand, prompting NSSF to petition the Supreme Court for review.
  • NSSF argues the Supreme Court should take the case due to a circuit split on the interpretation of the PLCAA's predicate exception, as well as the proliferation of similar anti-PLCAA laws in 10 states.

The players

National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF)

The Firearm Industry Trade Association that petitioned the Supreme Court to review New York's public nuisance law.

Andrew Cuomo

The former Governor of New York who stated the state's law was intended to 'reinstate the public nuisance liability for gun manufacturers' that Congress prohibited in the PLCAA.

Lawrence G. Keane

NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel, who argued the New York statute is intended to evade the will of Congress in passing the PLCAA.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We earnestly believe that New York's punitive public nuisance law is exactly what Congress had in mind when it passed the PLCAA with a bipartisan majority. The PLCAA is designed to prohibit frivolous lawsuits against members of the firearm industry based on the criminal actions of remote third parties, and we continue to believe the New York statute is intended to evade the will of Congress.”

— Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel (lawenforcementtoday.com)

What’s next

The Supreme Court will decide whether to take up NSSF's petition and review the Second Circuit's ruling that allowed New York's public nuisance law to stand.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing legal battle between the gun industry and states seeking to hold manufacturers accountable for gun violence, despite federal protections under the PLCAA. The Supreme Court's decision could set an important precedent on the scope of the PLCAA's predicate exception and whether states can enact laws to circumvent the federal law.