Background
The Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation (SAF), in partnership with Safari Club International (SCI), has taken decisive action by filing a critical Amicus Curiae brief in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Lowy v. Daniel Defense, LLC. This litigation is the latest attempt by anti-firearms groups to circumvent the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which largely forbids holding firearms manufacturers liable for the criminal misuse of their lawful products.
Plaintiffs in the case argue that legal industry advertisements and social media posts, which depict activities like recreational shooting and hunting, constitute “incitement” or “deceptive commercial speech” that encourages unlawful acts. Filed on January 14, 2025, the Amicus Curiae brief of Safari Club International and Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation directly counters this novel legal theory, arguing that the First Amendment fully protects such non-misleading speech, even when a troubled individual later commits a heinous act.
Impact to Hunters
This legal challenge represents a direct threat to the financial foundation of American conservation. The firearms and ammunition industry is the primary funding source for the Pittman-Robertson (P-R) Act, a successful user-pay system that imposes an excise tax on product sales to finance state wildlife management and habitat restoration.
Should anti-gun groups succeed in crippling the firearms industry with this liability theory, the consequences would be catastrophic for conservation. Billions in Pittman-Robertson funding, all of our conservation successes…it would all collapse. We have to stand and fight (SAF Files Brief Protecting Firearms Industry’s First Amendment Rights). Furthermore, SAF and SCI, which use publications and social media to promote hunting, are concerned that this broad liability theory could also be applied to them, chilling their own freedom of speech and restricting their members’ access to Second Amendment-focused messages.
Where We Stand Now
The amicus brief strongly urges the Fourth Circuit to reject this attenuated and “unworkable” theory of liability. The core argument is that holding manufacturers liable for a third party’s criminal acts, based on lawful, non-misleading speech, is a violation of the First Amendment. It contends that the legal responsibility for criminal misuse rests solely with the criminal actor, not the lawful speaker or product manufacturer. SAF and SCI, representing tens of thousands of sportsmen, are standing firm to defend both the First and Second Amendments, securing the future of hunting and the industry that supports it against those seeking to destroy our traditions.
Help Us Fight for You
Your tax-deductible donation to the Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund directly supports our legal fights in courtrooms nationwide. The Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund was established to represent sportsmen in lawsuits that affect your ability to hunt, fish, trap and own firearms. Its funding ensures the sportsman’s voice is heard above the rhetoric of anti-hunting groups.
Join the fight for your hunting and fishing future by donating to the Sportsmen’s Legal Defense Fund today!
