National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo
Argued March 18, 2024
Decided May 30, 2024
Full case nameNational Rifle Association of America v. Maria T. Vullo
Docket no.22-842
Questions presented
Does the First Amendment allow a government regulator to threaten regulated entities with adverse regulatory actions if they do business with a controversial speaker, as a consequence of (a) the government's own hostility to the speaker's viewpoint or (b) a perceived "general backlash" against the speaker's advocacy?
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett · Ketanji Brown Jackson
Case opinions
MajoritySotomayor, joined by unanimous
ConcurrenceGorsuch
ConcurrenceJackson
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I

National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo is a United States Supreme Court case which held that if Maria T. Vullo, the former director of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), discouraged financial institutions in the state from doing business with the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), such conduct would constitute a violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Background[edit]

Following the Parkland high school shooting, the superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) Maria T. Vullo advised banks and insurance companies in the state of New York not to provide services to the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), an organization that lobbies in support of gun rights in the United States. The NRA sued Vullo, alleging a First Amendment violation.[1] A three-judge panel of United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled against the NRA. Judge Denny Chin wrote that while government officials may not "use their regulatory powers to coerce individuals or entities into refraining from protected speech… government officials have a right — indeed, a duty — to address issues of public concern."[2]

Supreme Court[edit]

The NRA appealed the decision of the Second Circuit, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on November 3, 2023.[2][3] Oral arguments were heard on March 18, 2024. The NRA was represented by David D. Cole of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Vullo was represented by former acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal.[4]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI" (PDF). supremecourt.gov. Supreme Court of the United States. February 7, 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 11, 2023. Retrieved 29 May 2024.
  2. ^ a b Liptak, Adam (November 3, 2023). "Supreme Court to Hear N.R.A.'s Free Speech Case Against New York Official". The New York Times. Retrieved March 22, 2024.
  3. ^ John Fritze (March 18, 2024). "Supreme Court grapples with claim that New York pressured businesses to cut ties with NRA". CNN. CNN. Archived from the original on March 18, 2024. Retrieved 29 May 2024.
  4. ^ Howe, Amy (March 18, 2024). "Court sympathetic to NRA's free speech claim". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved March 22, 2024.