By Mark Oliva<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al.<\/em><\/a><\/strong>, the case in which the Mexican government is suing several U.S. firearm manufacturers for $10 billion in damages. Mexico alleges their lawful and heavily regulated business practices are \u201caiding and abetting\u201d the illegal straw purchase of firearms that are then illegally smuggled by transnational narco-terrorist drug cartels south into Mexico. Those illegally-smuggled firearms are then provided to the cartels and then criminally misused in Mexico which causes Mexico to spend money. The justices wrestled with Mexico\u2019s lawyers\u2019 theory that U.S. manufacturers \u201caided and abetted,\u201d noting that if that were so, law enforcement, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), missed what would otherwise be considered the crime of the century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n NSSF filed an amicus brief<\/a><\/strong> supporting Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al.<\/em>, in its petition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf Mexico is right, then every law enforcement organization in America has missed the largest criminal conspiracy in history operating right under their nose, and Budweiser is liable for every accident caused by underage drinkers since it knows that teenagers will buy beer, drive drunk and crash,\u201d said<\/a><\/strong> Noel Francisco, lawyer for the plaintiffs Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al.<\/em>, who petitioned the case to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n