Connect with us

Politics

At Supreme Court, Mexico to Offer Culprit for Cartel Violence: Gun Makers

Published

on

At Supreme Court, Mexico to Offer Culprit for Cartel Violence: Gun Makers

Mexico’s president offered a warning last month in response to news that the Trump administration planned to designate drug cartels as terrorist groups.

“If they declare these criminal groups as terrorists, then we’ll have to expand our U.S. lawsuit,” Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico’s president, said at a news conference.

She was referring to an unusual lawsuit that will be heard by the Supreme Court on Tuesday in which Mexico argues U.S. gun manufacturers have aided in the trafficking of weapons used by the cartels.

The case reverses longstanding complaints by President Trump that Mexican cartels have contributed to rising violence in the United States. Instead, Mexico argues the majority of guns found at Mexican crime scenes come from the United States. It seeks some $10 billion in damages from U.S. gun makers.

The dispute comes before the justices at a time of heightened tension between the two countries as the Trump administration leans on Mexico to crack down on illegal migration and cartel organizations. Tariffs on imported goods from Mexico are scheduled to go into effect on Tuesday — the same day the justices are set to consider the guns lawsuit.

Advertisement

President Trump has cited drug trafficking from Mexico as one of the factors driving the decision to impose tariffs. His administration has taken a number of steps to push back on the cartels, including designating more than a half-dozen of the criminal groups as foreign terrorist organizations. That move could result in penalties, including criminal charges, for companies found to be entangled with the cartels, but it has also raised concerns from the Mexican government of a potential violation of Mexico’s sovereignty.

Lawyers for Mexico argue that U.S. manufacturers and gun dealers are complicit in what they call an “iron river” of firearms pouring into the country and arming cartels. They point to strict controls on gun purchases in Mexico, where civilians are not allowed to purchase the types of rapid-fire, powerful military-style weapons favored by the cartels, as evidence that as many as half a million firearms are smuggled from the United States into Mexico each year.

“It is far easier and far more efficient to stop the crime gun pipeline at its source and to turn off the spigot,” said Jonathan Lowy, president of Global Action on Gun Violence and a longtime litigator against the gun industry who has worked on the case on behalf of Mexico.

The gun makers, joined by a slew of gun groups including the National Rifle Association, have argued the lawsuit would undermine gun rights in the United States.

“Mexico has extinguished its constitutional arms right and now seeks to extinguish America’s,” the N.R.A. said in a brief in support of the gun makers. “To that end, Mexico aims to destroy the American firearms industry financially.”

Advertisement

The case may be viewed skeptically by the Supreme Court, where the 6-3 conservative supermajority has worked to expand gun rights. But at a time when Mr. Trump has targeted the country, it has offered a forum for Mexico to publicize its counter case that U.S. gun manufacturers share the blame for cartel violence. The Mexican government has also sued several gun stores in Arizona and could expand the effort by filing additional suits.

At a conference last month in Latin America, Pablo Arrocha, a legal adviser for Mexico’s foreign ministry, said that two lawsuits filed so far marked only the beginning of a broader legal strategy to push back against the flow of guns across the border.

For years, Mexico has pushed the United States to do more to curtail the trafficking of American manufactured guns over the border. When Mr. Trump announced he would delay tariffs against Mexico earlier this month, both nations had agreed to address their respective concerns: Mexican authorities promised to work to stem the flow of drugs across the border while U.S. authorities would try to combat gun trafficking.

In recent days, there have been signs of improving relations between the two countries, including when the Mexican government this week sent to the U.S. nearly 30 top cartel operatives wanted by the American authorities. But inside the White House, Mr. Trump’s advisers remain split over whether to take more substantial action in Mexico, including carrying out military strikes against Mexican drug cartels.

A White House spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

Mexico first sued multiple gun companies in 2021, arguing that the cartel bloodshed was “the foreseeable result of the defendants’ deliberate actions and business practices.”

A trial court judge dismissed the case, finding it was barred by a 2005 federal law that limits litigation against gun manufacturers and distributors and has provided immunity from actions brought by the families of people killed and injured by their weapons.

A unanimous panel of judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, in Boston, overturned that decision. They found that the lawsuit met the criteria for a part of the law allowing for litigation in cases where knowing violations of firearms laws are a direct cause of the plaintiff’s injuries.

Gun makers asked the justices to hear the case, Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, No. 23-1141. Lawyers for Smith & Wesson argued Mexico had presented a legal theory that was an “eight-step Rube Goldberg, starting with the lawful production and sale of firearms in the United States and ending with the harms that drug cartels inflict on the Mexican government.”

The lawyers contend the gun makers acted lawfully in the United States and cannot not be held responsible for illegal cartel behavior in Mexico. They cited a 2023 Supreme Court case in which the court ruled unanimously that social media companies could not be sued for aiding terrorism because they hosted posts from ISIS.

Advertisement

A trial court judge dismissed Mexico’s case against six of the defendants on other grounds, leaving the Supreme Court’s decision in the case to apply to claims against Smith & Wesson, a gun manufacturer, and Interstate Arms, a wholesaler.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs contributed reporting.

Politics

Kristi Noem grilled over L.A. Purple Heart Army vet who self-deported

Published

on

Kristi Noem grilled over L.A. Purple Heart Army vet who self-deported

The saga of a Los Angeles Army veteran who legally immigrated to the United States, was wounded in combat and self-deported to South Korea earlier this year, became a flashpoint during a testy congressional hearing about the Trump administration’s immigration policy.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem was grilled Thursday on Capitol Hill about military veterans deported during the immigration crackdown launched earlier this year, including in Los Angeles.

“Sir, we have not deported U.S. citizens or military veterans,” Noem responded when questioned by Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.).

Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.) speaks during a hearing of the House Committee on Homeland Security on Thursday. He was joined on a video call by Sae Joon Park, a U.S. military veteran who self-deported to South Korea.

(Mark Schiefelbein / Associated Press)

Advertisement

An aide then held up a tablet showing a Zoom connection with Purple Heart recipient Sae Joon Park in South Korea. The congressman argued that Park had “sacrificed more for this country than most people ever have” and asked Noem if she would investigate Park’s case, given her discretion as a Cabinet member. Noem pledged to “absolutely look at his case.”

Park, reached in Seoul on Thursday night, said he was skeptical that Noem would follow through on her promise, but said that he had “goosebumps” watching the congressional hearing.

“It was amazing. And then I’m getting tons of phone calls from all my friends back home and everywhere else. I’m so very grateful for everything that happened today,” Park, 56, said, noting that friends told him that a clip of his story appeared on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” show Thursday night.

The late-night host featured footage of Park’s moment in the congressional hearing in his opening monologue.

Advertisement

“Is anyone OK with this? Seriously, all kidding aside, we deported a veteran with a Purple Heart?” Kimmel said, adding that Republicans “claim to care so much about veterans, but they don’t at all.”

Park legally immigrated to the United States when he was 7, grew up in Koreatown and the San Fernando Valley, and joined the Army after graduating from Notre Dame High School in Sherman Oaks in 1988.

Sae Joon Park

Sae Joon Park received a Purple Heart while serving in the Army.

(From Sae Joon Park)

The green card holder was deployed to Panama in 1989 as the U.S. tried to depose the nation’s de facto leader, Gen. Manuel Noriega. Park was shot twice and honorably discharged. Suffering post-traumatic stress disorder, he self-medicated with illicit drugs, went to prison after jumping bail on drug possession charges, became sober and raised two children in Hawaii.

Advertisement

Earlier this year, when Park checked in for his annual meeting with federal officials to verify his sobriety and employment, he was given the option of being immediately detained and deported, or wearing an ankle monitor for three weeks as he got his affairs in order before leaving the country for a decade.

At the time, Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said Park had an “extensive criminal history” and had been given a final removal order, with the option to self-deport.

Park chose to leave the country voluntarily. He initially struggled to acclimate in a nation he hasn’t lived in since he was a child, but said Thursday night that his mental state — and his Korean-language skills — have improved.

“It hasn’t been easy. Of course, I miss home like crazy,” he said. “I’m doing the best I can. I’m usually a very positive person, so I feel like everything happens for a reason, and I’m just trying to hang in there until hopefully I make it back home.”

Among Park’s top concerns when he left the United States in June was that his mother, who is 86 and struggling with dementia, would die while he couldn’t return to the county. But her lack of awareness about his situation has been somewhat of a strange blessing, Park said.

Advertisement

“She really doesn’t know I’m even here. So every time I talk to her, she’s like, ‘Oh, where are you?’ And I tell her, and she’s like, ‘Oh, when are you coming home? Oh, why are you there?’” Park said. “In a weird way, it’s kind of good because she doesn’t have to worry about me all the time. But at the same time, I would love to be next to her while she’s going through this.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order

Published

on

Video: Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order

new video loaded: Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order

transcript

transcript

Trump Signs A.I. Executive Order

Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that would limit individual states in regulating the artificial intelligence industry.

“It’s a big part of the economy. There’s only going to be one winner here, and that’s probably going to be the U.S. or China. You have to have a central source of approval. When they need approvals on things, they have to come to one source. They can’t go to California, New York.” “We’re not going to push back on all of them. For example, kids’ safety — we’re going to protect. We’re not pushing back on that. But we’re going to push back on the most onerous examples of state regulations.”

Advertisement
Trump signed an executive order on Thursday that would limit individual states in regulating the artificial intelligence industry.

By Shawn Paik

December 11, 2025

Continue Reading

Politics

Kilmar Abrego Garcia seen for first time since release, pledges to ‘continue to fight’ Trump admin

Published

on

Kilmar Abrego Garcia seen for first time since release, pledges to ‘continue to fight’ Trump admin

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Salvadorean migrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia vowed Friday to “continue to fight and stand firm against all of the injustices this government has done upon me,” in his first appearance since being released from federal immigration custody.

Garcia spoke as he appeared for a check-in at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Baltimore, Maryland, as part of the terms of his release.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, right, listens with is brother Cesar Abrego Garcia during a rally ahead of a mandatory check at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Baltimore, on Friday, Dec. 12, 2025, after he was released from detention on Thursday under a judge’s order. (Stephanie Scarbrough/AP)

U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered Abrego Garcia released from the ICE Moshannon Valley Processing Center in Philipsburg, Pa., on Thursday on the grounds that the Trump administration had not obtained the final notice of removal order that is needed to deport him to a third country, including a list of African nations they had previously identified for his removal.

Advertisement

“Since Abrego Garcia’s return from wrongful detention in El Salvador, he has been re-detained, again without lawful authority,” Xinis said in her order on Thursday.

The Justice Department is expected to challenge the order.

“This is naked judicial activism by an Obama appointed judge,” Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a social media post. “This order lacks any valid legal basis and we will continue to fight this tooth and nail in the courts.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Thursday afternoon that the Trump administration would “absolutely” be appealing Xinis’ order, which she described as another instance of “activism” from a federal judge.

Abrego Garcia had been living in Maryland with his wife and children when he was initially arrested.

Advertisement

Abrego Garcia’s case epitomized the political firestorm that has ensued since March, when he was deported to El Salvador and housed in the country’s CECOT mega-prison, in violation of a 2019 court order and in what Trump officials acknowledge was an “administrative error.” Xinis ordered then that Abrego Garcia be “immediately” returned to the U.S.

Upon his return to the United Sates, Abrego Garcia was immediately taken into federal custody and detained on human smuggling charges that stemmed from a 2022 traffic stop.

The Trump administration has claimed he is a member of MS-13, which Abrego Garcia denies.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration previously tried and failed to deport him to the African nations of Liberia, Eswatini, Uganda and Ghana.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending