Washington, D.C. – The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the National Rifle Association (NRA) can proceed with certain claims in its lawsuit alleging that a former New York state official violated the gun rights group’s free speech protections by pressuring financial institutions to cut ties.
In a unanimous decision, the high court found that the NRA sufficiently showed that former New York Financial Services Superintendent Maria T. Vullo likely breached the gun rights group’s First Amendment protections through some, but not all, of the actions the NRA accused her of taking against banks and insurance agencies affiliated with it.
The decision reverses a unanimous Second Circuit panel decision, which had found that the NRA’s claims could not survive a motion to dismiss because it failed to show that Vullo’s actions were coercive and that those claims would not survive Vullo’s qualified immunity protections regardless.
“A government official can share her views freely and criticize particular beliefs, and she can do so forcefully in the hopes of persuading others to follow her lead,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the majority. “What she cannot do, however, is use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.”