Using litigation to prevent gun violence
Did you know current data shows that in the United States there are more guns than people (approximately 1.5 guns per person); that in 2023 guns were involved in 55% of all suicides and 79% of homicides; that in 2024 there were 44,447 firearm related deaths; and that firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teenagers?
These statistics were among those cited by Megan Walsh in UMRA’s final Living Well Workshop for the 2025-26 academic year on May 12. Professor Walsh is the founder and director of the Gun Violence Prevention Clinic at the University of Minnesota Law School. This clinic assists the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office in defending the constitutionality of Minnesota’s gun regulation laws, and seeks proactively to rein in unlawful gun use.
A topic of hot debate
How best to regulate guns is a topic of hot debate. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution “preserves the right to bear arms,” and the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) provides broad immunity to the gun industry against civil litigation asserting the industry’s responsibility for firearm-related harms. But the right to bear arms is not unlimited, and there are exceptions in PLCAA to non-liability for industry actors.
For example, if a gun manufacturer markets an automatic weapon for civilian combat-style use (e.g., “consider your man card reissued”) in violation of a state’s consumer protection laws against unfair trade practices, the manufacturer may be sued for playing a substantial role in causing injuries in a mass shooting involving the manufacturer’s so-advertised weapon.
Similarly, if a gun retailer—with reasons to be suspicious—sells a gun to a buyer who is procuring the gun as a “straw” purchaser for a criminal actor in violation of a state’s gun sale laws (e.g., overheard in-store phone conversation between buyer and an outsider, “I am sending you photos of your various options.”), the retailer can be pursued for civil liability for harm caused.
So, there are many ways to rein in gun misuse aside from an absolute ban on manufacturing automatic weapons for civilian purchase, including a number of approaches to encourage the gun industry to make and market powerful guns more carefully under existing law.
Working to prevent gun violence is a bit like working with slices of Swiss cheese, Walsh explained. Although each slice has its own holes, when you put the slices together, they form a solid block of cheese. So, too ,there is no one simple fix to gun violence. Each strategy will address some, but not all, of the causes of gun violence, but when you use multiple approaches together you can create a comprehensive system where the weaknesses of one layer are covered by the strengths of another.
Whatever your personal views might be on a civilian right to bear arms, you can participate in reducing gun violence in many ways, by supporting gun-injury survivors, posting social media commentary, writing and sending letters to newspapers, supporting local political candidates, and educating youth on the safe-handling of guns, and the like.
—Bradley Clary, UMRA Program Committee
An advocate for gun violence prevention
Tue, May 12, 2026, at 11am
Megan Walsh
Founder and director, Gun Violence Prevention Clinic
University of Minnesota Law School
Event to be held via Zoom.
All of us can agree that reducing gun violence is an important goal, but there is sharp disagreement over what policies will accomplish that aim while also respecting the right to keep and bear arms provided by the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.
UMRA’s Living Well Workshop on Tuesday, May 12, via Zoom will feature Megan Walsh from the University of Minnesota Law School for a presentation on efforts to prevent gun violence through “strategic litigation.” This term is used to describe lawsuits against wrongdoers in the gun industry. The lawsuits are specifically designed to address unlawful practices in selling, manufacturing, or advertising firearms, and thus to head off gun violence by challenging distribution practices upstream.
Congress in the early 2000s passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). The act affords broad immunity to the gun industry against civil claims asserting the industry’s responsibility for firearm-related harms. But the act contains certain exceptions, including the so-called “predicate exception”; in other words, if a gun industry player violates a pre-existing statute that applies to the sale or marketing of firearms, PLCAA does not bar an action claiming the seller violated that pre-existing law and thus played a substantial role in causing injuries.
Soto v. Bushmaster Firearms International, LLC is an example. After the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in 2012, representatives of the families of nine of those killed sued the maker of the Bushmaster assault weapon used by the perpetrator, arguing that the maker “knowingly marketed and promoted” the shoulder-fired rifle’s “unmatched ability to kill civilians”; did so to an individual with dreams of going into combat; and, thereby, violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, which prohibits unfair competition and deceptive acts. Soto was able to proceed under the PLCAA predicate exception, and opened the door to a number of successful lawsuits holding the gun industry accountable for wrongful conduct.
Megan Walsh is the founder and director of the Gun Violence Prevention Clinic and a visiting assistant clinical professor of law at the University. She and her clinic students were honored as Minnesota Attorneys of the Year in 2024 for their work defending Minnesota gun regulation laws.
Please register and tune in to this webinar at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, May 12, for more insights. Registrations will be accepted up to and including the day of the webinar.
—Bradley Clary, UMRA Program Committee