All nine justices determined that the venerable organization was targeted by a scheme devised to destroy it financially and force it to close its doors. The plan, the high court observed, originated with former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and was implemented by his Department of Financial Services (DFS).
The NRA’s case was brought against former DFS Superintendent Maria T. Vullo, who was accused of doing Cuomo’s bidding.
New NRA President Bob Barr lauded the sweeping decision. “This victory is a win for the NRA in the fight to protect freedoms. This is a historic moment for the NRA in its stand against governmental overreach. Let this be clear: the voice of the NRA membership is as loud and influential as ever. Regulators are now on notice: this is a win for not only the NRA, but every organization who might otherwise suffer from an abuse of government power.”
NRA attorneys argued the merits of their case before the court on March 18. They were joined by several legal and constitutional scholars, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in attacking the actions of New York officials.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the court’s opinion. “Six decades ago, this Court held that a government entity’s ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion’ against a third party ‘to achieve the suppression’ of disfavored speech violates the First Amendment.”
Sotomayor noted that the NRA “plausibly alleges that respondent Maria Vullo did just that.”
The justice added that Vullo is free to criticize the gun rights organization, but she could not use the regulatory power of her state agency “in order to punish or suppress the NRA’s gun-promotion advocacy.”
The case dated back to 2018, when the NRA first alleged that Vullo and Cuomo conspired to “financially blacklist” their organization. The DFS pushed financial institutions and insurers to sever all links with the group to suppress its advocacy.
This was done, according to the NRA, through “guidance letters” and other means of threatening to implement the power of the state against those who did not comply.
The legal action against Vullo survived several attempts by New York officials to have it tossed aside. The state triumphed, at least temporarily, when it received a favorable ruling from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
Incredibly, the panel determined that Vullo’s guidance to banks and insurers was simply a personal expression despite being written on the official letterhead of her regulatory agency. She implored businesses to be “socially responsible” and guard against potential backlash for conducting business with the weapons industry.
The NRA did not surrender after this setback.
Instead, a petition was filed to the U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 7, 2023, to obtain a review of the controversial decision. That review was granted the following November and heard in March.
Support for the plaintiffs came from dozens of lawmakers across the political aisle as well as 25 state attorneys general. First Amendment scholars were aghast at the blatant state effort to use its powerful regulatory influence to suppress free speech.
Even groups that disagree in principle with the NRA’s Second Amendment advocacy understood the threat to basic freedoms from such official oppression.
With the high court’s unanimous decision, National Rifle Association v. Vullo is remanded to the lower court. It revives the organization’s charge that its First Amendment rights were systematically violated by New York state officials.
They say the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is one.
Well, the Pew Collectors Anonymous is your way of admitting you have a problem buying guns but you have no intentions of solving that problem, because Pew Collectors Anonymous isn’t about solving a problem; it’s about embracing it.
So be sure to hit the link above and grab your Pew Collectors Anonymous T-Shirts, Hats, and Drinkware.
Click below to purchase.
