Nat'l Rifle Ass'n of Am. v. Vullo

What the court held

The NRA sued a former New York financial-services regulator, alleging she coerced insurers and banks into cutting ties with the organization in retaliation for its gun-rights advocacy. On remand from the Supreme Court, which had held the complaint stated a plausible First Amendment claim, the Second Circuit again held the official was entitled to qualified immunity because existing precedent did not clearly establish that regulatory pressure aimed at the nonexpressive conduct of third parties amounted to unconstitutional coercion or retaliation. It reversed the denial of her motion to dismiss and remanded for entry of judgment dismissing the remaining claims.

Summarized from the court's opinion.

What this case is about

First Amendment claim that a New York regulator coerced insurers and banks to cut ties with the NRA

GunMapUSA summary of the issue, not a quotation from the court.

Key Dates

• 2025-07-17 — Decided

Sources

• CourtListener — retrieved 2026-08-08