Colorado leads efforts to challenge industry immunity, with other states following suit in tightening gun laws.

In the wake of increasing mass shootings, lawmakers in Colorado, along with at least five other states, are working to curb the legal immunity that has shielded gun manufacturers and dealers from being held responsible for the misuse of their products. This new legislative push aims to hold the gun industry more accountable for the role it plays in mass violence.

Colorado’s proposed bill, which is expected to be formally introduced Thursday, seeks to repeal a 2000 law that has protected firearm companies from liability for crimes committed with their products. The bill also proposes a code of conduct that targets how firearms are marketed and designed, with particular attention to advertising practices that may appeal to vulnerable groups, such as young men at risk of violence.

The bill draws from recent high-profile cases, such as the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, where families of victims reached a $73 million settlement with the gun manufacturer. In that case, plaintiffs argued that the company’s marketing strategies, which aimed at young, at-risk men, contributed to the tragedy.

If passed, Colorado would join states like California, New York, Delaware, and New Jersey, all of which have recently passed similar laws. However, these states are now facing legal challenges, as a federal law passed in 2005 offers the gun industry broad immunity from lawsuits related to the use of its products.

Gun control advocates, including Ari Freilich from Giffords, argue that this exemption from accountability is unprecedented and harmful, preventing victims of gun violence from pursuing justice. Freilich believes that the new legislation will allow these victims to hold the gun industry accountable for failing to take reasonable precautions in designing and selling firearms.

Mark Oliva, of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which has launched lawsuits against similar state laws, warns that Colorado’s bill would likely face significant legal challenges. He compares the situation to the case of Coors Brewing Company, arguing that if the beer manufacturer is not held responsible for drunk driving, gun manufacturers should not be held liable for how their customers use firearms.

Despite these concerns, the sponsors of Colorado’s bill argue that it offers some leeway, giving states the power to regulate the gun industry. For example, the bill would prevent companies from marketing firearms in a way that encourages illegal conversions, such as advertising semi-automatic rifles capable of holding large-capacity magazines, which are illegal in Colorado.

The bill also aims to eliminate a provision in Colorado law that requires plaintiffs to pay the defendant’s attorney fees if their case is dismissed. This provision previously led to the financial ruin of two parents of a woman killed in the 2012 Aurora theater shooting.

Rep. Sonya Jaquez Lewis, a Democrat and one of the bill’s sponsors, emphasised the importance of ensuring that victims, including those affected by the Club Q shooting, have access to the legal system. She also stated that the bill would help level the playing field with other industries that do not enjoy the same legal protections as the gun industry.

Supporters of the bill believe that by holding the industry liable, it will create an incentive for companies to better regulate themselves. Rep. Javier Mabrey, another sponsor, argued that civil liability would encourage the gun industry to adhere to existing laws.

However, the bill may face opposition from Republicans in Colorado’s statehouse. Republican Rep. Mike Lynch, the minority leader in the Colorado House, declined to comment on the bill, as he had not seen the draft. Senate President Steve Fenberg expressed support for the bill, stating his excitement about the legislation’s progress.

Governor Jared Polis has yet to publicly state his stance on the bill, leaving uncertainty around the potential for its passage.

Proposed constitutional amendment aims to solidify state’s anti-abortion stance amidst ongoing debate.

A proposal to further entrench Missouri’s abortion restrictions was reviewed on Wednesday by a state Senate committee. Introduced by Republican Senator Mike Moon, the legislation seeks to amend the Missouri Constitution to explicitly state: “Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion.”

Moon advocated for the measure, saying, “Let the voters decide. They will affirm that life is precious and should not be prematurely ended through abortion.”

Missouri already enforces a near-total abortion ban, which came into effect following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade last year. However, abortion-rights advocates have discussed pursuing ballot initiatives to restore access, though no formal proposals have yet been introduced.

In Missouri, citizens have the power to propose changes to state laws and the Constitution through ballot measures, a process that allows voters to bypass the Legislature. This tool has often been used to address divisive issues or topics lawmakers are unwilling to tackle.

Moon’s proposal would itself require voter approval if it passes the Republican-controlled Legislature before the session ends in mid-May.

Advocates for abortion rights have urged lawmakers to reject the measure. Vanessa Wellbery, vice president of policy and advocacy at Planned Parenthood Advocates of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, highlighted the impact of current laws, stating, “We are once again explaining that abortion bans cause devastating harm to patients and communities by denying essential care.”

The proposed amendment is the latest effort by Missouri Republicans to solidify their anti-abortion position, as debates over reproductive rights continue to spark intense political and public discourse.

The Finance Secretary becomes the third candidate in the contest to succeed Nicola Sturgeon as Scotland’s First Minister.

Scotland’s Finance Secretary, Kate Forbes, has officially announced her candidacy to succeed Nicola Sturgeon, marking her entry as the third contender for SNP leadership. Her declaration follows announcements by Scottish Health Secretary Humza Yousaf and former community safety minister Ash Regan.

Ms Forbes, currently on maternity leave after welcoming her first child last year, shared her vision to lead Scotland towards a more unified future. She highlighted her credentials, stating she has the “experience, competence, and vision” to inspire both SNP members and the wider electorate.

In a Twitter video, Forbes emphasised the significance of the upcoming leadership decision, noting it will shape the future for Scotland’s children. She called for a leader who can unite the party after recent divisions over gender recognition reforms, pledging to listen, collaborate, and lead with integrity.

“I am ready to take on the challenges ahead with boldness, energy, and determination,” Forbes said. “Scotland needs leadership that inspires confidence, and I am prepared to offer just that.”

Her bid comes as Constitution Secretary Angus Robertson and other potential candidates, including Deputy First Minister John Swinney and SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn, declined to enter the race, citing personal reasons.

Meanwhile, Humza Yousaf, launching his campaign in Clydebank, prioritised party unity and achieving Scottish independence. Yousaf highlighted his decade-long governmental experience, which includes leading challenging portfolios like transport, justice, and the NHS during its recovery phase. Addressing critics, he asserted that his leadership could steer the party and Scotland forward.

Ash Regan, the third candidate, has taken a different stance, particularly on North Sea oil. She opposes accelerating net-zero targets if it risks jobs and economic stability in affected regions, advocating a balanced approach.

Forbes, however, faces scrutiny due to her opposition to certain SNP policies, particularly on gender reforms, which may complicate collaboration with the Greens, who have a co-operation agreement with the SNP.

As a member of the Free Church of Scotland, Forbes gained prominence in 2020 when she delivered the national budget on short notice after her predecessor’s resignation. While her conservative social views diverge from party mainstream, she insists her focus remains on building a united and prosperous Scotland.

Candidates have until Friday to secure 100 nominations across at least 20 local branches to appear on the ballot. The new leader of the SNP, and potentially Scotland’s next First Minister, will be announced on 27 March.