KY lawmakers push bill to protect gun industry from lawsuits, punish plaintiffs
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Rep. T.J. Roberts' HB 78 advanced from committee to the House floor.
- Bill shields gun industry from suits tied to criminal use and allows immediate appeals.
- Plaintiffs who sue in violation face dismissal, fees, $250/day penalties.
The gun industry must be protected from the liability lawsuits that can follow deadly shootings in Kentucky, a Republican lawmaker said Wednesday before his civil immunity bill advanced to the House floor.
House Bill 78 would expand on existing state and federal liability protections for gun manufacturers and gun dealers as a lawsuit continues in Louisville over the 2023 mass shooting at the Old National Bank that left five people dead and eight wounded.
The bill also would punish people who sued gun-related businesses in violation of the liability shield, including the dismissal of their lawsuits and civil penalties that could be enforced by the attorney general.
The House Judiciary Committee voted 16-to-3 to approve the bill.
“House Bill 78 protects an industry from liability that has brought in at least $964 million to the Kentucky economy in just 2023 alone and supports nearly 5,000 jobs at a minimum,” the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. TJ Roberts, R-Burlingon, told the committee.
“We have to make sure that that industry exists in order for this constitutional right to continue to exist,” Roberts said.
There was no committee debate over the bill. Three members of the Democratic minority voted no.
“I can’t think of a single time that I’m going to vote in favor of a gun manufacturer,” said state Rep. Lindsey Burke, D-Lexington.
“So I can’t be a yes. I have to be a no,” Burke said. “I wish that we spent more time on protecting people from gun violence and not on protecting the people who manufacture the guns.”
The National Rifle Association sent an alert to its members on Tuesday urging them to contact Kentucky lawmakers and tell them to vote for the bill to stop “frivolous lawsuits in an effort to bankrupt the firearms industry.”
On April 10, 2023, 25-year-old Connor Sturgeon walked into Old National Bank in downtown Louisville, where he worked, and opened fire on his colleagues.
Family members of the victims and survivors of the shooting have a lawsuit pending in Jefferson Circuit Court against River City Firearms, where Sturgeon made purchases, and two companies that sell firearms accessories, RSR Group Inc. and Magpul Industries Corporation. A trial is scheduled for June 2027.
In their suit, the plaintiffs allege that River City Firearms ignored certain red flags, such as Sturgeon appearing visibly uneasy and unfamiliar with firearms, when it sold him an AR-15-style rifle with extra tactical equipment to improve his aim and shooting capacity.
Sturgeon claimed he needed the weapon for “home defense,” store witnesses said, according to the suit.
Four days later, Sturgeon was able to fire nearly 30 rounds in 23 seconds inside the Old National Bank conference room. He loaded a new magazine before exchanging fire with responding police officers, who killed him.
There are existing state and federal laws that provide the gun industry with a fair amount of protection from product liability lawsuits after shootings in Kentucky, including the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, passed by Congress in 2005.
However, even with those laws on the books, the Old National Bank lawsuit survived a motion to dismiss last year.
Much of the lawsuit centers on the claims about the sale of gun accessories, which the judge last year ruled were not barred by the federal law because they are “accessories” and not “component parts” essential to the firearms function.
“Instead of recognizing the outward manifestations of mental turmoil, the plaintiffs allege that not only did River City sell the shooter a weapon not suited for his stated purpose of self-defense, but also upsold him enhancements to make the firearm even deadlier,” Jefferson Circuit Judge Mitch Perry wrote.
Roberts’ seven-page House bill would in great detail broaden the civil immunity protections enjoyed by the gun industry when it faces litigation arising from the criminal use of firearms or ammunition that were lawfully sold.
The bill would go a step further, in fact, and make it easier for a gun industry defendant to immediately appeal the denial of a motion to dismiss, such as the one suffered last year by the defendants in the Old National Bank suit.
Any plaintiffs or their attorneys who filed or continued a lawsuit in violation of the new liability shield would be penalized by the dismissal of their suit and financial burdens including the defendants’ legal fees, court costs and civil penalties up to $250 per day.
The attorney general would have the power to intervene in any related litigation and enforce the penalties mentioned in the bill.
Also, the gun manufacturers or gun dealers would be allowed to sue the plaintiffs for damages, including punitive damages if they can establish that the plaintiffs acted with malice or willful misconduct.
