January 14, 2026

South Carolina Bill Aims to Fortify Firearm Industry Against ‘Lawfare’

By Larry Keane

As state legislatures across the country grapple with how to address the criminal misuse of firearms, South Carolina lawmakers have taken a decidedly different path with the introduction of House Bill 4723 — a measure aimed at strengthening legal protections for the lawful manufacture, distribution and sale of firearms and related products. The proposal, known as the “South Carolina Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA),” reflects a proactive effort to block what supporters describe as “opportunistic lawsuits” that seek to hold honest businesses, like South Carolin-based FN America and Palmetto State Armory, liable for criminal misuse of their products.

A Shield Against Frivolous Civil Liability

HB 4723 would amend South Carolina Code to prohibit “qualified civil liability actions” against firearm manufacturers, retailers, sellers and trade associations for harms that flow from the criminal or unlawful use of a firearm or accessory. The bill’s legislative findings explicitly recognize the individual right to keep and bear arms under both the U.S. and South Carolina constitutions and frame robust industry protections as essential to preserving that right and maintaining a vibrant marketplace.

Under the measure, lawsuits premised on public nuisance or similar theories that seek to treat lawful commerce as inherently actionable would be barred, aligning state law with the obvious principle that criminal conduct — not the mere sale or manufacture of a product — is the true cause of harm.

Proponents argue these frivolous “lawfare” suits have goals beyond compensation for injury — namely, to siphon resources from the firearm industry and to effectuate “legislation through litigation.” By erecting statutory walls against such litigation, supporters contend the bill would help prevent antigun activists and municipalities from exploiting civil courts to punish lawful actors for crimes they did not commit. The measure would still allow traditional claims for negligent entrustment, breach of warranty or injuries tied to defective products, as well as actions involving willful violations of statutory sale or marketing laws, ensuring that legitimate accountability remains intact.

Federal and State Law Context

The concept behind HB 4723 is not novel. At the federal level, the PLCAA has, since 2005, limited civil liability actions against firearm manufacturers and retailers when their products are used in crimes. PLCAA’s protections have survived legal challenges and reflect the longstanding legal principle that sellers generally are not responsible for the criminal acts of unrelated remote third parties. States such as Indiana and others have enacted similar state-level protections to reinforce or extend the PLCAA’s framework at the local level.

South Carolina’s proposal mirrors this approach by codifying a strong presumption against liability in cases where a third party’s misuse of a firearm is the proximate cause of harm. In doing so, the state not only reinforces Second Amendment safeguards but also seeks to prevent what many in the firearm community view as a destabilizing trend of litigation targeting the industry.

HB 4723 would offer peace of mind for retailers, distributors, manufacturers and trade associations that operate within South Carolina’s borders. The firearm industry frequently emphasizes the importance of predictable legal environments to facilitate investment, expansion and consumer services. Without such protections, retailers argue, the mere threat of costly litigation — even where they have complied with all laws and safety standards — can chill business activity and jeopardize the availability of firearms and accessories in the marketplace.

Critics of “lawfare” protections contend that robust liability standards help incentivize safer business practices. However, backers of HB 4723 maintain that existing product liability and negligence laws already serve that purpose without exposing law-abiding sellers to novel and expansive and bankrupting theories of liability.

A Stark Contrast: Virginia’s Civil Liability Expansion

While South Carolina moves to close the courthouse door on suits targeting lawful firearm commerce, other states such as Virginia are considering the opposite trajectory. Virginia Senate Bill 27 and its companion House Bill 21 would impose new “standards of responsible conduct” on firearm industry members, with violations potentially deemed a public nuisance. Under the Virginia proposal, injured parties — including the state attorney general or local prosecutors — could pursue injunctions, damages and attorney’s fees against retailers and manufacturers whose lawful conduct is found to “contribute” to harm, even where the proximate cause is the unlawful misuse of a firearm by a criminal.

Such a regime would represent a fundamental shift from traditional tort principles and the protections offered under PLCAA, exposing industry members to broader civil liability for downstream criminal acts. This divergence highlights the battleground on which Second Amendment rights are being fought — in courtrooms and legislatures alike.

South Carolina’s HB 4723 underscores a clear philosophical stance: protect lawful commerce and ensure that federal and state law work in tandem to prevent courts from becoming arenas for policy battles better suited for legislatures.

As similar bills advance or falter across the country, the debate over how best to balance individual rights, public safety and industry certainty will persist in the months and sessions ahead. NSSF will be watching closely.

You may also be interested in: 

Busse’s Back Again

Sen. Blumenthal’s ‘Background Check Completion Act’ Is a Backdoor Delay-Until-Denied Scheme