Mexico isn't quite what we might call a failed state--now called a "fragile" state--but it's not all that far from it, either. The government has no ability to control large sections of territory within its own borders and I'm pretty sure that if the Cartels decided to take more territory, the Mexican government couldn't do much about it.

But they can blame the United States for their problems, that's for sure.

They've long pretended their issues were the result of American guns and not the fact that they're becoming a corrupt narco-state. That's because they can't afford to have the U.S. too angry at them, so they just try to put us on the defensive and trust that an anti-American media will help. It's worked so far.

Part of their effort, though, filing a lawsuit against gun manufacturers. 

That lawsuit should be tossed, and there are some very good reasons why beyond my preferred, "Because it's stupid."

Although several defendants have already been dismissed from the case on jurisdictional grounds, the legal theories underlying the case against the remaining defendants could disrupt multiple American industries with more tort claims. Mexico would expand proximate causation to broad foreseeability. It would also make a business’s knowledge that its products are being misused by third parties the justification for a tort claim of “aiding and abetting” those bad actors.

Making the case even more untenable are the explicit protections for American firearms manufacturers and dealers within the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) of 2005. The law bars lawsuits against firearms companies stemming from the criminal misuse of their products. This law was passed in the wake of lawsuits brought by local governments in the United States that attempted to hold gun manufacturers liable for gang violence.

Even interpreted as a political vehicle to express frustration with the American gun industry, this case is part of former President López Obrador’s extensive record of bad-faith engagement with U.S.–Mexico border politics. Our southern border has long been a site of northbound human and drug trafficking, along with southbound gun and currency trafficking.

López Obrador, however, spent the six years of his term scorning cross-national efforts and shirking Mexico’s role in stopping cartels from exporting fentanyl. He often expressed disdain for U.S. government requests to increase action against the cartels, telling U.S. Homeland Security Advisor Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, “Here, we do not produce fentanyl, and we do not have consumption of fentanyl.” While this is untrue on both counts, it indicates the approach his administration took to the illicit opioid crisis, suggesting Americans fix it by addressing “their problem of social decay.”

The hypocrisy of suggesting Americans bear full responsibility for our opioid epidemic while gun manufacturers owe Mexico billions of dollars due to Mexico’s gun violence epidemic is clear. But it is part of an odd pattern of public statements and actions from López Obrador that seemed to run interference for the cartels.

That's right, we're supposed to police literally everything crossing the border south, despite it already being illegal to transport guns outside of the United States without express permission--which has never been granted for gun traffickers, by the way--while they're not responsible for anything that comes north.

Yeah, that's a big problem for me.

Moreover, though, is the fact that there's no evidence that gun manufacturers are actually playing any role in gun trafficking beyond making a product that is lawful here in the United States that isn't in Mexico. There's been no evidence of these manufacturers knowingly conducting illegal sales, illegally exporting firearms, or doing anything that would directly contribute to guns being trafficked into Mexico.

All they've done is make guns.

The truth is that Mexican officials wanted to shift the blame for their inability to prevent large portions of their own territory from becoming cartel havens with no respect for the rule of law and so they shifted it to us.

That's not what our legal system is meant for. That's not how it's supposed to work.

So yeah, here's hoping the Supreme Court bounces the lawsuit because nothing about it is justified. Nothing at all.