ACLU Defends NRA’s Free Speech Case Before Supreme Court

ACLU Defends NRA's Free Speech Case Before Supreme Court

Strange Bedfellows: NRA and ACLU Court Case

Strange Bedfellows: NRA and ACLU Court Case

The Court Case Overview

The National Rifle Association (NRA) will be represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in a First Amendment case against New York’s Department of Financial Services. The case focuses on comments made by former New York State Department of Financial Services superintendent Maria Vullo, who called on banks and insurance companies operating in New York to cut ties with gun-promoting groups. The NRA sued Vullo after multiple entities decided not to do business with the organization. The federal appeals court in New York previously rejected the NRA’s claims.

The Unlikely Alliance

Despite the fact that the ACLU “vigorously” opposes nearly everything the NRA stands for, the New York-based civil liberties group has confirmed that it will provide legal representation for the gun-rights group in this case. In a statement, the ACLU stated that it doesn’t support the NRA’s mission or viewpoints on gun rights, and it doesn’t agree with their goals, strategies, or tactics. However, both organizations agree that government officials can’t punish organizations because they disapprove of their views. The NRA reshared the ACLU’s statement on its social media account and wrote in a follow-up post that it was “proud” to stand with the ACLU and others who recognize that “regulatory authority cannot be used to silence political speech.”

The Potential Ramifications

If the Supreme Court doesn’t intervene, the ACLU argued that it could create a “dangerous playbook” for regulatory agencies across the country to blacklist or punish “viewpoint-based organizations”, including abortion rights groups, environmental groups, and even the ACLU itself. The ACLU contended that the questions at the core of this case are about the First Amendment and the principled defense of civil liberties for all, including those with whom the organization disagrees on the Second Amendment.

The dissenting voices

Not all voices within the ACLU are in favor of the decision to represent the NRA. The New York Civil Liberties Union released a statement, disagreeing with the decision and stating that it would not participate in the case, even though it originated in New York. Executive Director Donna Lieberman said that the important First Amendment issue in the case is well-established, the NRA is one of the most powerful organizations in the country and has sophisticated counsel. Representing the NRA directly risks enormous harm to the clients and communities the ACLU and NYCLU work with and serve.

Long-tail Keywords:

  • National Rifle Association First Amendment case
  • American Civil Liberties Union and National Rifle Association alliance
  • Supreme Court regulatory authority First Amendment case
  • New York State Department of Financial Services First Amendment case
  • New York State Department of Financial Services superintendent Maria Vullo First Amendment case
  • Regulatory authority and political speech First Amendment case
  • Viewpoint-based organizations First Amendment case
  • First Amendment case dissenting voices

Originally Post From

Read more about this topic at
The Strange Alliance – Seventeen Moments in Soviet History
“The Strange Alliance and the Onset of Cold War”

Donald Trump Returns to Court, Hails Defense Expert’s Testimony on Accounting Fraud Absence

“Kentucky Law DUI First Offense”