On October 25, 2023, the city of Lewiston, Maine, was shattered by a tragedy that would become one of the deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history. Eighteen people lost their lives and more than a dozen others were injured when Robert Card, an Army reservist, opened fire at a local bowling alley and a nearby bar and grill. Now, nearly two years later, over 100 survivors and families of the victims are taking the federal government to court, alleging that the U.S. Army could—and should—have prevented the massacre.
According to ABC News, the group of plaintiffs, represented by a coalition of law firms, officially filed their lawsuit on September 3, 2025. This follows a legal notice sent last October, which gave the federal government six months to respond. After ten months without acknowledgment or action, the survivors and families said they had no choice but to proceed with civil litigation.
The lawsuit, stretching to 119 pages, is unflinching in its allegations. It claims the Army had clear and repeated warnings about Card’s deteriorating mental health, his access to weapons, and his explicit threats—including a chilling warning just weeks before the shooting that he planned to commit a mass shooting. "Well before the mass shooting, the Army was aware that Robert Card had classic warning signs of high risk to himself and the public," the suit asserts. The legal team contends that the Army’s own mandatory processes and promises to Card’s family, medical providers, and local law enforcement created a legal duty to intervene—one the Army failed to fulfill.
Investigations by the Army and an independent state commission, as reported by CBS News, concluded that there were numerous opportunities for intervention as Card’s mental health unraveled. Card’s downward spiral was not subtle: he exhibited paranoid and delusional behavior, was hospitalized by the Army during training in July 2023, and even admitted to homicidal ideation and creating a "hit list" of people he intended to kill. The lawsuit states, "By March 2023, the United States and its personnel knew Card was paranoid, delusional, violent, and lacked impulse control. The Army knew he had access to firearms. The Army promised to remove his guns but did not fulfill that promise."
The Army’s own investigation, as cited by ABC News, found "multiple communication failures between military and civilian hospitals, as well as with SFC Card’s chain of command," which impacted Card’s continuity of care. These failures, the plaintiffs argue, were not just bureaucratic missteps but potentially life-and-death errors. The Army had mandatory reporting systems, crisis intervention protocols, and state law procedures specifically designed for cases like Card’s, but those policies were "violated" in failing to take "mandatory action," the lawsuit claims.
One of the most alarming warnings came in September 2023, when a fellow reservist texted, "I believe he’s going to snap and do a mass shooting." Despite this explicit alert, Army Captain Jeremy Reamer dismissed the warning, reportedly calling the reservist "not the most credible of our Soldiers," according to the lawsuit. Just a month later, Card would carry out the Lewiston massacre.
Card’s hospitalization in July 2023 at Keller Army Community Hospital, during Army training in New York, was supposed to be a turning point. Army medical providers determined Card "posed a significant risk of violence" and conditioned his release on the removal of his personal weapons from his home. They also recommended restricting his access to military weapons and ammunition. Yet, as the lawsuit details, no one ensured Card was taking his medication or complying with follow-up care after he returned home to Bowdoin, Maine. The Army, the suit alleges, "withheld information and actively misled local law enforcement, thereby preventing others from intervening and separating Card from his weapons."
Attorney Benjamin Gideon, one of the lead counsels, stated, "If the Army does not accept accountability here, where it knew its soldier had severe mental illness, had access to weapons and was warned in advance that he planned to commit a mass shooting, then it’s hard to imagine the Army ever accepting accountability without being forced to do so in court."
For the families, the pain remains raw. Cynthia Young, who lost both her husband William and her 14-year-old son Aaron in the shooting, said, "The Army’s inaction cost us everything. No family should have to endure this heartbreak when so many warning signs were ignored."
The legal team representing the Lewiston victims is formidable. In addition to Maine-based firms Gideon Asen and Berman & Simmons, the plaintiffs are backed by Koskoff, Koskoff & Bieder—a Connecticut firm that previously secured a $73 million settlement for victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting—and National Trial Law, which helped survivors of the Sutherland Springs church shooting in Texas reach a $230 million settlement with the U.S. Air Force.
While the lawsuit focuses on federal responsibility, it does not ignore the findings of the state commission, which documented that local law enforcement, specifically the Sagadahoc County Sheriff’s Office, had probable cause to take Card into protective custody and begin proceedings to confiscate his firearms under Maine’s "yellow flag" law. The commission’s report also prompted new gun laws in Maine, though these remain hotly debated, especially among gun rights advocates. In November, Maine voters will decide whether to adopt a "red flag" law, which would allow family members—as opposed to just law enforcement—to petition a judge to temporarily remove firearms from individuals in crisis.
Following the shootings, the Army disciplined three Army Reserve leaders for dereliction of duty. Lt. Gen. Jody Daniels, then chief of the Army Reserve, acknowledged "a series of failures by unit leadership." The Army, in a statement after the governor’s commission report, said it was "committed to reviewing the findings and implementing sound changes to prevent tragedies like this from recurring."
Yet for survivors and families, such promises ring hollow. Attorney Travis Brennan of Berman & Simmons voiced a question that lingers for many: "Without accountability what hope can we have of preventing this kind of tragedy from repeating itself?"
The Lewiston lawsuit stands as both a demand for justice and a test case for institutional accountability when warning signs are missed and tragedy follows. As the legal process unfolds, it’s clear that the wounds from that October night remain fresh—for a community, for families, and for a nation still searching for answers.
