Mark Udall: “some of my constituents have let me know they disagreed with my past vote against similar legislation. They asked me to…”

“some of my constituents have let me know they disagreed with my past vote against similar legislation. They asked me to take a closer look and consider voting for this bill today, and I promised to do so. However, after careful review of the bill and consideration of points raised by its supporters and opponents, I have concluded that I cannot in good conscience vote for it. I voted against similar legislation in the past because I was not convinced there was a need for Congress to take such action to restrict certain lawsuits against the manufacturers and sellers of firearms. And I still am not convinced that the potential adverse consequences of those lawsuits are so great that Congress should close the courthouse door to people who think they have valid claims. And, as in the past, I am particularly reluctant to support legislation that would go further than barring future lawsuits by requiring the immediate dismissal of cases under active consideration by the courts. It seems to me that this is a dangerous precedent for the legislative branch to undertake, and the courts are in a much better position than Congress to decide whether the people who have brought those pending cases have valid claims or whether their complaints are frivolous or malicious. It happens that this bill deals with lawsuits against firearms manufacturers.…”