The Slatest

Did Bernie Sanders Just Say Sandy Hook Families Should Have the Right to Sue a Gun Manufacturer?

Bernie Sanders has been criticized heavily in recent weeks for telling the New York Daily News editorial board that, in keeping with his 2005 vote for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, he did not believe that the relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook massacre should be able to sue the manufacturer of the weapon used in the murders.

Daily News: There’s a case currently waiting to be ruled on in Connecticut. The victims of the Sandy Hook massacre are looking to have the right to sue for damages the manufacturers of the weapons. Do you think that that is something that should be expanded?

Sanders: Do I think the victims of a crime with a gun should be able to sue the manufacturer, is that your question?

Daily News: Correct.

Sanders: No, I don’t.

The issue of the Sandy Hook suit was brought up Thursday night at CNN’s Democratic debate in Brooklyn, and in answering moderator Wolf Blitzer’s question about it, Sanders seemed to say that he did think the families should have the right to sue. I mean, those are the exact words he used: Right to sue.

Blitzer: So, Senator, do you owe the Sandy Hook families an apology? 

Sanders: No, I don’t think I owe them an apology. They are in court today, and actually they won a preliminary decision. They have the right to sue, and I support them and anyone else who wants the right to sue. 

This would be an odd way for Sanders to drop a position he’s already taken so much grief for, but he also seemed to leave himself some wiggle room to do so during an answer to the previous question about his 2005 vote:

I was concerned that, in rural areas all over this country, if a gun-shop owner sells a weapon legally to somebody and that person then goes out and kills somebody, I don’t believe it is appropriate that that gun-shop owner who just sold a legal weapon to be held accountable and be sued. But what I do believe is when gun-shop owners and others knowingly are selling weapons to people who should not have them, somebody walks in, they want thousands of rounds of ammunition, or they want a whole lot of guns, yes, that gun shop owner or that gun manufacturer should be held liable. 

Is this an official reversal? Or was he just making a throwaway tautological comment, like “they should have the right to formally file a lawsuit that is then duly dismissed”? I’ve emailed the Sanders campaign for comment and will update this post if they (or he) clarifies what he meant by “the right to sue.”

Read more Slate coverage of the Democratic primary.