The United States Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, U.S., February 29, 2024.
Evelyn Hockstein | Reuters
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the National Rifle Association can pursue a claim that a New York state official’s efforts to encourage companies to end ties with the gun rights group constituted unlawful coercion.
The justices unanimously found that the NRA can move forward with arguments that its free speech rights under the Constitution’s First Amendment were violated by the actions of Maria Vullo, the then-superintendent of the New York state Department of Financial Services.
The case is one of two before the justices concerning alleged government coercion of private entities. The other involves claims that the Biden administration unlawfully pressured social media companies when it urged them to remove certain content.
“Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,” liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote on behalf of the court.
The NRA appealed a 2022 ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said Vullo’s actions did not constitute unlawful conduct, meaning the free speech claim should be dismissed.
In a 2018 lawsuit, the gun rights group zeroed in on an investigation by Vullo’s office into insurance companies that the NRA had worked with to provide coverage for members. The gun group is based in Virginia but was incorporated in New York,
In the aftermath of the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, in which 17 people were killed, Vullo also urged insurance companies and banks to reconsider any relationships they had with gun rights-affiliated groups.
Vullo’s lawyers argued that it was well established that a government official in her position could encourage entities to consider reputational risks.
Discussion about this post