Committee adopts substitute and advances bill clarifying PLCAA predicate exception
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
The committee adopted Substitute 1 and recommended HB214 favorably; sponsors said the bill clarifies the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) so manufacturers remain liable for defects or negligent marketing but are not exposed to lawsuits for third‑party criminal acts.
Representative Tuscher presented HB214 as a clarification to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), saying courts in some cases have allowed suits that the PLCAA was meant to preclude. Clark Kaposhen, representing the Utah Shooting Sports Council and the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told the committee the bill preserves legitimate claims for manufacturing defects or negligent sellers but prevents litigation that effectively tries to hold manufacturers responsible for crimes committed by third parties.
Representative Moss asked whether the bill would protect manufacturers who engage in deceptive marketing; Kaposhen said false or fraudulent marketing claims would remain actionable and would not be shielded by this bill. Clark Aposhen and Rael Cunningham provided public comments in support, noting local manufacturers could be harmed by litigation strategies that attempt to expand PLCAA exceptions.
The committee adopted Substitute 1 to clarify statutory language and then voted to recommend HB214 (as substituted) favorably; the chair ruled the motion passed unanimously.
Next steps: HB214 as substituted will move forward from committee.
