Skip to main content
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

BREAKING: Leftist Non-Profit Comes To The Aid Of Second Amendment Advocacy Group!

I am just as shocked as you are, that’s why I had to share.

The ACLU is now representing the NRA in their Supreme Court case against New York’s Financial Services regulator in a lawsuit alleging First Amendment violations.

According to that lawsuit, NYFS allegedly engaged in a concerted campaign to cut off banking and insurance relationships between the NRA and its partners.

This is yet another example of a regulator, advocate group, or corporate entity attacking First and Second Amendment rights via economic extortion and sabotage.

The ACLU announced on Saturday: “We’re representing the NRA at the Supreme Court in their case against New York’s Department of Financial Services for abusing its regulatory power to violate the NRA’s First Amendment rights.

The government can’t blacklist an advocacy group because of its viewpoint.

We don’t support the NRA’s mission or its viewpoints on gun rights, and we don’t agree with their goals, strategies, or tactics. But we both know that government officials can’t punish organizations because they disapprove of their views.”

Reason Magazine outlined the NRA petition and provided an excerpt:

The Second Circuit’s opinion below [rejecting the First Amendment claim] gives state officials free rein to financially blacklist their political opponents—from gun-rights groups to abortion-rights groups to environmentalist groups and beyond.

Americans had mixed reactions to the unlikely alliance between the ACLU and the NRA. Some believed it was refreshing, some were critical, and others noted that hell had frozen over.

Taken directly from the ACLU website, here is their full, stated position on Second Amendment rights:

Gun Control: The Second Amendment provides: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

ACLU Position: Given the reference to “a well regulated Militia” and “the security of a free State,” the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right.

For seven decades, the Supreme Court’s 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view.

In striking down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court’s decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia.

The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court’s conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment.

However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

Analysis: Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU’s own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made.


Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

Leave a comment
Thanks for sharing!