Supreme Court deals blow to government censorship
The United States Supreme Court delivered a blow to government censorship and a major victory for free speech with its recent ruling in NRA v. Vullo.
Background
In 2018, 19-year-old Nikola Cruz opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Cruz murdered 17 people and injured 17 others before fleeing on foot to nearby Coral Springs, where he was arrested by police.
The shooting provided an opportunity for gun rights critics to renew their calls for gun control. It also offered a springboard to anti-gun officials who were looking to crack down on firearms.
New York tells financial institutions: Cut off the NRA
One of those officials was New York Department of Financial Services (DFS) Superintendent Maria Vullo. With the help of then-Governor Andrew Cuomo, Vullo began to pressure bankers and insurers into refusing to do business with the National Rifle Association (NRA). She met with executives from such financial giants as Lloyd’s of London, an international insurance provider.
Vullo made it clear to Lloyd’s executives that she would look the other way on the company’s legal infractions if it ended its relationship with the NRA. Lloyd’s agreed to scale back its business with the NRA and stop underwriting gun-related policies. In return, Vullo agreed to concentrate the state’s scrutiny only on companies which do business with pro-gun groups.
Lloyd’s and other financial institutions also understood from Vullo that they could expect enforcement actions from the DFS if they did not discontinue their arrangements with the NRA.
In addition, Vullo sent letters to banks and insurers warning them of the “reputational risk” of doing business with the NRA and other gun rights groups, with whom she strongly urged them to sever ties. Major corporations like Lockton and Chubb complied.
Supreme Court: Vullo violated First Amendment
The NRA sued Vullo, accusing the official of violating the First Amendment by using her office to crack down on “disfavored” views. In a unanimous decision issued on May 30th, all US Supreme Court justices agreed.
“Six decades ago, this Court held that a government entity’s ‘threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion’ against a third party ‘to achieve the suppression’ of disfavored speech violates the First Amendment. Today, the Court reaffirms what it said then: Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,” reads the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The court affirmed that public officials are allowed to disagree with whatever political viewpoints they wish. Using the power of their offices to suppress those viewpoints, however, violates free speech.
“Ultimately, the critical takeaway is that the First Amendment prohibits government officials from wielding their power selectively to punish or suppress speech, directly or (as alleged here) through private intermediaries,” said the court’s decision.
The NRA was represented in this case by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a far-Left legal advocacy group.
“Today’s decision confirms that government officials have no business using their regulatory authority to blacklist disfavored political groups,” ACLU National Legal Director David Cole commented on the ruling.
