Supreme Court Revives NRA’s New York ‘Blacklisting’ Suit (3)

The US Supreme Court revived National Rifle Association claims that a New York state official unconstitutionally pressured insurance companies including Chubb Ltd. and Lloyd’s of London to stop doing business with the gun lobby.

The justices unanimously said the state’s alleged “blacklisting” of the NRA, if proven, would violate the group’s free speech rights. A federal appeals court had thrown out claims against former Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo.

The decision limits the ability of government officials to use their positions to undermine the work of advocacy groups. The court is considering similar issues in a still-pending fight over Biden administration communications with social media companies.

The dispute involves Vullo’s 2017-18 investigation of the NRA’s “Carry Guard” insurance program, which covers losses associated with the use of personal firearms, including criminal defense costs. The NRA alleges Vullo went on to target other insurance products it endorsed, saying she threatened the companies offering the policies with investigations and penalties if they didn’t distance themselves from the gun-rights group.

“The complaint, assessed as a whole, plausibly alleges that Vullo threatened to wield her power against those refusing to aid her campaign to punish the NRA’s gun-promotion advocacy,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the court.

The NRA also points to guideline letters and a press release in which Vullo urged insurers to evaluate the risk to their reputations if they dealt with the NRA. She issued those documents after the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Vullo Reaction

The ruling doesn’t guarantee the NRA complaint will go forward to trial. In siding with Vullo, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals also said she had so-called qualified immunity because the law wasn’t clearly established in the NRA’s favor.

The Supreme Court didn’t directly resolve the qualified-immunity issue, though Sotomayor said in two footnotes that the 2nd Circuit might want to reconsider that aspect of its ruling.

Vullo’s lawyer, Neal Katyal, said her legal team is “confident Ms. Vullo’s claim of qualified immunity will be reaffirmed.” He also said the allegations against her are false.

“Ms. Vullo did not threaten, coerce or retaliate against anyone in the performance of her duties,” he said.

William A. Brewer III, a lawyer who represents the NRA, called the ruling “a landmark victory for the NRA and all who care about our First Amendment freedom.”

Sotomayor said the Supreme Court established in a 1963 case involving the distribution of adult books and magazines that the government can’t try to suppress speech it opposes by threatening action against third parties unless they help with the crackdown.

“Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,” she wrote.

The claims against Vullo are part of a broader lawsuit that also named former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as a defendant.

The case is National Rifle Association v. Vullo, 22-842.

(Updates with NRA reaction in 11th paragraph.)

--With assistance from Tatyana Monnay.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Elizabeth Wasserman at ewasserman2@bloomberg.net

© 2024 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.