Based on that premise, I'd say surviving victims and the families of those that died have a pretty good case for negligence against the mall owners and any businesses therein that subsribed to such a ridiculous policy.

Obviously the rule did absolutely nothing to prevent or deter the criminal act. So what was the purpose of such a rule?

I would expect to see ownership of that mall change hands soon, based on court orders if nothing else.
_________________________
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.
-- Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)