The attempt has been unsuccessful so far, but this does not mean their efforts can’t eventually bear fruit.

“More than a dozen Republican attorneys general are defending American gun manufacturers against a lawsuit from Mexico that says the companies should be liable for gun violence south of the border, an argument that California and other Democrat-led states are supporting,” according to Fox News Digital.

The report continued:

Mexico’s lawsuit claims U.S. gun manufacturers like Smith & Wesson, Ruger and others are liable for gun violence south of the border because they are aware that their firearms are being trafficked into the country.

Mexico’s lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge in Massachusetts last year, but Mexico appealed its case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, and the suit is supported by California and other Democrat-led states.

However, Republican attorneys general, led by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, argue that Mexico’s legal theory lacks factual and legal support. They contend that American gun manufacturers cannot be held responsible for gun violence in Mexico, emphasizing that policy choices by the Mexican government, faulty policies by the United States, and criminal actions are the main factors behind the violence.

The attorneys general highlight that only a small number of weapons recovered at crime scenes in Mexico can be traced back to the United States, contrary to Mexico’s claims. They argue that many American guns recovered in Mexico were sold wholesale to the Mexican military and law enforcement, and ended up in cartel hands after being abandoned by soldiers or police officers.

This team-up between the Mexican government and Democrats is a rather interesting way to attack the Second Amendment. But there are several likely reasons why this curious alliance was formed.

Let’s start with Mexico

The Mexican government’s lawsuit against U.S. gun manufacturers seems to be a convenient ploy to deflect attention from its inability, or unwillingness, to deal with the rampant drug cartel violence plaguing the country. Instead of focusing on implementing effective strategies to combat the drug cartels, Mexico is attempting to shift the blame onto American firearm manufacturers.

By accusing these companies of knowingly allowing firearms to be trafficked across the border, Mexico hopes to create a narrative that absolves its government of responsibility. It seems to be nothing more than a red herring with a hair trigger. It might be a way for the Mexican government to remain in the good graces of their citizenry, by gaslighting them into believing the violence is the fault of American corporations.

The Democrats

Meanwhile, Democrats are using Mexico’s lawsuit as another avenue to attack gun rights by targeting gun manufacturers. After all, the anti-gunner lobby has been targeting these companies for years, trying to pass legislation that would allow them to be sued if one of their firearms is used in a violent crime. Indeed, Giffords Law Center is exploiting the mass shooting in Allen, Texas, to do just that. Democrats are hoping that by partnering with a foreign government, they can finally deal a devastating blow to gun rights in America.

Republicans have pointed out that the lawsuit seeks to undermine the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a law that shields gun companies from liability for the misuse of their products by others. The GOP attorneys general contend that this case exemplifies precisely why the PLCAA was enacted—to protect gun manufacturers from baseless lawsuits and financially crippling attacks from anti-gun groups. If this unholy alliance succeeds, it could open the door to an onslaught of lawfare against gun manufacturers.

The fact that the lawsuit failed initially is promising. But the anti-gunners are not going to give up that easily.