No Way: Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick Who Resigned Before Getting Expelled Is Running for Re-...
They Can’t Even Flip Burgers
Breaking Up 'Big Medicine' Won't Fix What Washington Broke
Clarence Thomas and Our Founding Principles
Blue States Are Bleeding Population and Congressional Seats — The Fiscal Reckoning Is...
Questioning Vaccines Isn’t Fringe — Even Among Harris Voters
Federal Employees Play Childish Games With Presidential Orders to Protect Their Own Agenda...
The 10 Commandments Are a Threat to Marxism
Swiss Neutrality, Chinese Utility: A Foreign Policy Conundrum
How the SPLC Profited by Smearing Groups Like Mine
Democrats Created Today's Insurance Mess. Republicans Are Fixing It.
Nigerian-Led Fraud Ring Defrauded Victims of More Than $50 Million, Feds Say
Florida Security Consultant Allegedly Faked 18 Employees to Pocket $258K in Pandemic Relie...
Feds: Tacoma Grocer Pocketed $600K by Trading Food Benefits for Cash
Trump Administration Launches $22 Billion Clawback of COVID-19 Loan Fraud for 562,000 Loan...
Tipsheet

NRA Scores Big Win at the Supreme Court

NRA Scores Big Win at the Supreme Court
National Rifle Association

The National Rifle Association scored a win at the Supreme Court Thursday when justices ruled 9-0 the Second Amendment organization's First Amendment lawsuit against financial regulators in New York can move forward. The NRA sued New York after former Superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services Maria Vullo - under pressure from New York Attorney General Letitia James - pressured private financial institutions not to do business with the group with threats of government regulation. The ruling reverses a Second Circuit decision stating Vullo's actions "constituted permissible government speech and legitimate law enforcement." 

Advertisement

The NRA argued Vullo "violated the First Amendment by coercing DFS-regulated parties to punish or suppress the NRA’s gun-promotion advocacy." 

"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," Justice Sonja Sotomayor wrote in the unanimous opinion. "Today, the Court reaffirms what it said then: Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors. Petitioner National Rifle Association (NRA) plausibly alleges that respondent Maria Vullo did just that. As superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services, Vullo allegedly pressured regulated entities to help her stifle the NRA’s pro-gun advocacy by threatening enforcement actions against those entities that refused to disassociate from the NRA and other gun-promotion advocacy groups. Those allegations, if true, state a First Amendment claim." 

"The Court holds that the NRA plausibly alleged that Vullo violated the First Amendment by coercing DFS-regulated entities to terminate their business relationships with the NRA in order to punish or suppress the NRA’s advocacy," Sotomayor continued. "The judgment of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated, and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

Advertisement

Related:

SECOND AMENDMENT



Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement