You may recall that a lawsuit was filed by relatives of the Sutherland Springs, Teas, church shooting against the store that sold the rifle to the chumbucket shooter. The theory they used was that the shooter used Colorado ID to purchase the rifle in Texas (legally). He also bought a 30-round magazine unlawful in Colorado. While federal law allows in person long arm sales to out-of-state residents, the sale of the firearm must comply with the laws of both states.
Plaintiffs stupidly argued that “firearm” includes “magazine,” and the store made an unlawful sale. More than two years ago, I rather vehemently disagreed. Sadly, the lower court displayed a level of idiocy on par with plaintiffs and allowed the case to go forward.
Well, it took more than two years — one might think that justice delayed is justice denied, but welcome to America — but the Texas Supreme Court finally weighed in. They slapped them down unanimously.
The lawsuits said that Kelley provided store clerks with a Colorado ID, and the U.S. Gun Control Act required Academy to comply with Colorado gun laws before approving the purchase. Colorado, however, prohibits the sale of magazines holding more than 14 rounds, while Academy sold Kelley a rifle that came packaged with a 30-round magazine.
But the court said the sale was legal because the federal law applies only to the sale of firearms, not components.
Thus, having not acted in a criminal or negligent manner, Academy retains immunity under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Told you so, “law professor” Lytton.
Here is the actual decision. I found this part of particular interest.
We hold that the underlying lawsuits are qualified civil liability actions that the PLCAA bars as a matter of law. Accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion in denying Academy’s
motion for summary judgment. We further hold that Academy lacks an adequate remedy on appeal. We therefore conditionally grant Academy’s petition for writ of mandamus and direct the trial court to grant Academy’s summary-judgment motion.
“Abused.” Generally, when I see a court overturning a lower court, they say the court “erred,” or was “incorrect.” Abused suggests that the Supreme Court is rather unhappy with that judge. As well they should be.
Hopefully, Academy Sports will now countersue for legal expenses., which I imagine have been substantial. I have no idea whether the plaintiffs will attempt to appeal this to the federal level (where all bets are off on sanity and Second Amendment rights recoginition). Frankly, I was surprised that this was filed in state court rather than federal, given that plaintiffs were attempting to cite federal law.
Every so often there is a court decision that when I read about it I kind of imagine I hear angels singing. So much of what winds up in court these days seems to be attempts at intimidation, bullying and abused is the right word I’d say.
I worked for a major firearms retailer and company policy was we would sell the rifle,pull the Colorado non-compliant magazine and replace it with a lower capacity.The purchaser could then also buy a high capacity mag if he wished to. Absurdity piled on absurdity but that was policy.
I worked for a NH retailer that made me check for a MA FOID on ammo sales.
So what happens to the judge? No penalty? Not a stinkin’ thing. Until they are made to pay a steep price for their abuse of power, it will not change. Stop protecting those who abuse power. Removal from office with no ability to get another office. Here’s looking at you former judge Hastings. The sci-fi writer was right. Anyone who seeks power should be taken out back and shot.