The 4-3 decision by the Connecticut Supreme Court to overturn a lower court decision and allow a lawsuit against Remington Arms to proceed is a case of judicial overreach. Remington manufactured the weapon used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.

The federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005, gives gun manufacturers immunity from liability claims when the weapons they produce are used in crimes. It is a terrible law, providing special treatment not provided to any other industry. But it is the law. The remedy — repeal — should come through the political process, not by the court giving a wink and a nod to a dubious legal argument that allows a lawsuit to proceed in contradiction of the law.

The work around to the federal law was the claim that the immunity protection does not extend to violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and the common law principal of “negligent entrustment.”

In other words, the court is giving the plaintiffs the chance to convince a jury to impose damages against Remington for recklessly and unethically marketing the AR-15 semiautomatic military-style weapon in violation of the unfair trade act. The plaintiffs will also try to show that by its actions the gun manufacturer entrusted a dangerous article to someone who was reckless or too inexperienced to use it safely.

That’s quite a legal stretch to get around the clearly stated immunity in the federal law. It suggests a court majority that had a policy in mind — exposing the gun manufacturer to scrutiny and liability for its role in this terrible crime — then using the legal contrivance handed to it by the plaintiffs to adapt its decision accordingly.

And then there is this. The gun was not sold to Adam Lanza, the perpetrator of the Sandy Hook killings. It was sold to his mother. Lanza stole it.

Call us old fashioned, but we would like courts to uphold the law unless a constitutional violation is clear, not make law or find ways to get around it. Just as we think Congress should control the power of the purse and not allow a president to use a phony national emergency to spend money how he wants.

The 2012 slaughter of 26 children and educators was horrible. In this editorial space we advocated for and applauded the outlawing of weapons such as the AR-15 in Connecticut. We want them outlawed nationally.

But if the branches of government do not stay in their constitutional lanes, the ingenious system of checks and balances breaks down. And that is not good for our state or country.

The Day editorial board meets with political, business and community leaders to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Timothy Dwyer, Executive Editor Izaskun E. Larraneta, Owen Poole, copy editor, and Lisa McGinley, retired deputy managing editor. The board operates independently from The Day newsroom.