The “slippery slope” argument is usually suspect, but here…
After the tobacco companies were successfully sued by the states, a lot of people seem to see suits as a way of making government policy without all that silly democracy nonsense.
Plus, if an industry is perceived as unpopular and can be sued for beaucoup beans, it behooves you to be the first one to do it - before they can cut some kind of immunity deal or you have to share the take with other people who may have been actually hurt. The states are already into the gun manufacturers suit, so the NAACP is jumping onboard while they’ve got the chance to get a piece. (Sweetheart, do these pants make me look cynical?)
Here’s a question: the states can easily show damage since the states have had to pay for law enforcement, medical care, etc. But what damages has the NAACP suffered? Is this a class action suit on behalf of black Americans, and if so, how do they intend to distribute any award to the actual victims? It seems like for the NAACP itself to be entitled to damages, they have to show that the NAACP itself was harmed. I’m no lawyer, though, am I wrong about this?