Decision on Motion to Dismiss NRA’s Claims Against New York
This is the decision of the court in NRA v. Cuomo, the NRA’s litigation against the State pertaining to its investigation of its Carry Guard product, on the State’s motion to dismiss the NRA’s complaint. As reported by Reuters, the Court “rejected most of the NRA’s causes of action, including its allegations that New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo conspired to threaten banks and insurance companies with regulatory scrutiny if they did business with the NRA. Judge McAvoy also tossed the NRA’s claim that state officials improperly interfered with the NRA’s business interests and held the gun rights group cannot seek an injunction to shield its future business partners. Nor can the NRA move forward with assertions that Cuomo and Vullo violated its right to associate with its members.” However, the Court did allow causes of action relating to potential First Amendment claims to proceed in the litigation.
- The bulk of the decision contains the legal doctrinal reasons for dismissal, however, there is a fairly detailed factual recitation of DFS’ investigation into Carry Guard from pages 4 – 13.
- The court notes “[a]s part of its investigation, DFS learned that, although it did not have an insurance producer license from DFS, the NRA engaged in marketing of, and solicitation for, the Carry Guard program.” (p.4)