Anyone know NRA's actual role in today's BIG 2A case?

Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
6,860
Reaction score
17,179
Location
PRNJ
It is my understanding that the NRA was behind today's big and long-awaited 2A win in the New York carry permit case. I know that Paul Clement, the captain of the legal ship, does a lot of work for NRA. I read that the Plaintiff in the case, the NYSRPA is the NRA's New York affiliate and that the "NRA" was "behind" the case.

Anyone know the nuts and bolts of NRA's actual role?

In any event GO TEAM!

Of course, this win proves just how critical it is to support the NRA, and to never ever bash the NRA in public under any circumstances whatsoever. If you have a beef with the NRA, or any other pro-2A group, take it up with them, in private.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
My limited understanding was that the NYS Rifle and Pistol Association is the NRA state-level affiliate, but that might be about it...
 
This is the NRA's press release:

Fairfax, Va. - The National Rifle Association (NRA) welcomes the Supreme Court's decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen. The Court affirmed that the right to bear arms does not stop at a person's front door. This is the most significant Second Amendment ruling in more than a decade.

"This is another landmark win for constitutional freedom and the NRA," says Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA. "The decision comes at an important time – as the Senate considers legislation that undermines Second Amendment freedom. This decision unequivocally validates the position of the NRA and should put lawmakers on notice: no law should be passed that impinges this individual freedom. It also confronts a troubling problem with the Senate legislation – underscoring that these freedoms should not be left to "unguided" discretion of state and federal officials. Second Amendment freedoms belong to the people."

LaPierre adds, "Decades of Right-to-Carry laws all across America have proven that good men and women are not the problem. This ruling will bring life-saving justice to law-abiding Americans who have lived under unconstitutional restrictions all across our country, particularly in cities and states with revolving door criminal justice systems, no cash bail and increased opposition to law-enforcement."

The NRA has been focused on promoting "shall-issue" protocols and eliminating "may-issue" laws since the late 1980s, and before today's decision, only six states and the District of Columbia still operated under "may-issue" statutes. The Supreme Court's ruling today marks the end of these subjective, unconstitutional permitting schemes.

"This is a monumental win for NRA members and for gun owners across the country. New York's egregious law, which left its residents' self-defense rights to the whim of a government bureaucrat, has been declared unconstitutional and must be changed. New Yorkers will soon be able to defend themselves outside of their homes without first having to prove that they have a sufficient "need" to exercise their fundamental rights," said Jason Ouimet, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). "This is more than just a great day for New York because this ruling opens the door to rightly change the law in the seven remaining jurisdictions that still don't recognize the right to carry a firearm for personal protection. The NRA has been at the forefront of this movement for over 30 years and was proud to bring this successful challenge to New York's unconstitutional law."

The case challenged New York's requirement that applicants for concealed carry licenses demonstrate "proper cause" to carry a firearm outside of their home. New York routinely used this requirement to deny law-abiding citizens the ability to properly protect themselves. New York is one of six states and the District of Columbia that operate under such a "may issue" regime, and the NRA has long fought to abolish this practice in favor of "shall issue" or "constitutional carry" in which law-abiding citizens can exercise their right to carry as long as they meet certain objective criteria.

While the importance of this case cannot be understated and today NRA members enjoy a well-deserved victory, NRA remains committed to continuing this fight. Today's ruling established the right to carry does not disappear at a person's front door, but many unconstitutional gun control laws remain in America. The NRA will continue to fight these laws until every law-abiding American can exercise their right to defend themselves and their families with the firearm of their choosing.
______________________________________________________________


5th paragraph emphasis: "The NRA has been at the forefront of this movement for over 30 years and was proud to bring this successful challenge to New York's unconstitutional law."

Sounds like the NRA is 100% in on this legal challenge.

Blaine
 
Last edited:
5th paragraph emphasis: "The NRA has been at the forefront of this movement for over 30 years and was proud to bring this successful challenge to New York's unconstitutional law."

Sounds like the NRA is 100% in on this legal challenge.

First, you know that the NRA backed the actual plaintiff, the NYSRPA. I would hazard a guess that the NRA was of great assistance in the entire litigation but in the background except when it filed an amicus brief with the appellate court and the SCOTUS.
 
Backing came from many places, including neighboring states. I received this in an email yesterday:

The Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs (VTFSC) and the Vermont State Rifle & Pistol Association (VSRPA) were parties to, and financially supported, an amicus (friend of the court) brief in support of NYSRPA in its challenge to the NY law.
In the court's main opinion, and in the three concurring opinions (Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett) there were only a handful of citations to pro-gun amicus briefs. Ours was cited twice, out of the 46 pro-gun briefs that were filed.
 
Back
Top