It is one of several suits that cities have filed against gun makers.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that federal law provides the gun industry with broad immunity from lawsuits brought by crime victims and violence-plagued cities.

The lawsuit said the industry violated public nuisance law by allowing widespread access to illegal firearms.

The Supreme Court's decision Monday to uphold Indiana's photo-ID law in elections will permit Republican-dominated legislatures in other states to pass legislation that liberal political advocates say will disenfranchise poorer, Democratic-leaning voters.

Project Vote, a liberal-leaning voter-registration group, said 59 voter-ID bills have been introduced in 24 states, nearly all of them by Republicans, during the 2008 legislative session. Republican legislators in 11 states also are pushing bills to require proof of citizenship to register to vote.

More than 20 states, including Arizona, require some type of identification at the polls. The Supreme Court, on a 6-3 vote, ruled that Indiana has a "valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,' " Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy.

Stevens said Indiana's desire to prevent fraud and to inspire voter confidence in the election system are important even though there have been no reports of the kind of fraud the law was designed to combat. The law does not apply to absentee balloting, where election experts agree the threat of fraud is higher.

The use of photo IDs as a way to curb voter fraud has become a touchstone for Democrats, who accuse the GOP of engaging in a vast conspiracy to restrict voting of the poor, the elderly and minorities.

Congress investigated the Bush administration's Justice Department last year over allegations that its Civil Rights Division had twisted enforcement of the nation's voting-rights laws to aid Republicans and had authorized restrictive voter-ID laws in various states.

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to prevent fraud.

It was the most important voting rights case since the Bush v. Gore dispute that sealed the 2000 election for George W. Bush. But the voter ID ruling lacked the conservative-liberal split that marked the 2000 case.

The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy. Stevens was a dissenter in Bush v. Gore in 2000. Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented, just as they did in 2000.More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

States began moving forward with plans for executions this week after the Supreme Court declined last Wednesday to review the appeals of death row inmates who had challenged lethal-injection methods in nearly a dozen states.

The court had issued orders staying several executions last year and earlier this year while it weighed whether Kentucky's lethal-injection procedure constituted cruel and unusual punishment. States had postponed at least 14 scheduled executions pending the high court's decision, creating a de facto moratorium on capital punishment, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, which opposes capital punishment.

In a 7 to 2 vote last week, the justices said the three-drug cocktail used by Kentucky, which is similar to the one employed by the federal government and 34 other states, does not carry so great a risk of pain that it violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

With three executions already scheduled for this summer, Virginia could be the first state to carry out the punishment after the resolution of the Kentucky case. The state has scheduled a May 27 execution date for Kevin Green, who killed a couple in Brunswick County; June 10 for Percy L. Walton, who killed three neighbors in Danville; and July 24 for Edward Nathaniel Bell, who shot a police officer in Winchester.

"I actually expect to see a spate of scheduled executions," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

Dieter said that despite its approval of Kentucky's lethal-injection procedure, the Supreme Court left room for lawyers to contest other states' procedures. "That sets the stage for a state-by-state resolution of this conflict," he said.

Attorneys contesting lethal injections have focused on training and procedures as ways to challenge them.

In numerous cases before federal and state courts, attorneys have argued that people who deliver anesthesia do not know how to insert a needle properly into a vein. They have contended that lighting has been poor during some executions, limiting the ability to see mistakes. And they have argued that some technicians hired to conduct medical procedures are not qualified.

The court blocked the executions of Thomas Arthur of Alabama, Earl Wesley Berry of Mississippi and Carlton Turner of Texas last fall while it considered a challenge to Kentucky's lethal injection procedures.

The high court ruled 7-2 last week that the procedures are not cruel, and the justices' last-minute orders temporarily sparing the three inmates automatically expired when the justices denied their appeals Monday.

Lisa Smith, a Dallas County assistant district attorney who handles capital cases, said Monday that the execution of Turner, who was convicted of killing his parents, likely will be set for summer.