Amicus Briefs
NRA v. Vullo
CASE SUMMARY
NCLA filed an amicus curiae brief in NRA v. Vullo calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to determine that the National Rifle Association plausibly accused New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo of violating its rights to free speech and association. Vullo issued statements effectively threatening to punish banks and insurance companies via regulatory action if they continued doing business with the NRA based on its pro-Second Amendment views, a clear First Amendment violation that must not stand.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that Vullo did not “coerce” the banks and insurance companies to end their relationships with the organization. The Second Circuit reached this conclusion by employing a four-factor test to decide whether Vullo’s actions amounted to “coercion” under the First Amendment. However, the proper approach would be to determine whether Vullo “abridged” the NRA’s First Amendment free speech and association rights—as she certainly did—not whether coercion occurred. The First Amendment forbids abridging these foundational freedoms.
In May 2024, the Supreme Court unamimously ruled that NRA plausibly accused Vullo of violating its First Amendment rights, a victory for NCLA.
OUR TEAM
RELEVANT MATERIALS
NCLA FILINGS
PRESS RELEASES
Seven Supreme Court Victories Underscore NCLA’s Success in Limiting Unlawful Administrative Power
August 19, 2024 | Read More
In NCLA Amicus Win, Supreme Court Revives NRA’s First Amendment Lawsuit Against NY Official
May 30, 2024 | Read More
NCLA Amicus Brief Asks Supreme Court to Apply Proper First Amendment Standard in NRA Case
January 16, 2024 | Read More
IN THE MEDIA
Is There Any Remedy When You’re Censored?
February 29, 2024