The National Rifle Association’s accusations that the state prosecutor general’s investigation into charges of pervasive fraud and incompetence at the gun organization is unfair political reprisal were denied by a New York court on Friday.
The NRA has filed counterclaims against Attorney General Letitia James, seeking monetary damages as well as a court order ending her legal litigation against the organization.
The NRA failed to make “any credible legal allegations that the Attorney General’s inquiry was illegitimately retaliatory or selective,” according to a 14-page opinion by State Supreme Court Justice Joel M. Cohen. The verdict was “disappointed” by the NRA’s lawyer, William A. Brewer III, but he said it would not “affect the NRA’s defense of the NYAG’s complaint.”
The Lawsuit Against National Rifle Association Can Go On For 2 Years
In 2020, James sued the NRA, charging its CEO Wayne LaPierre and other senior executives with “years of illicit self-dealing” that fueled a “luxurious lifestyle.”
The officials were accused of exploiting the nonprofit company as a “personal piggy bank,” spending millions of dollars from National Rifle Association reserves on trips and costly dinners for themselves and their families, according to the lawsuit.
The effort aimed to remove LaPierre from the organization and disband it, which is the country’s most popular gun lobbyist, among other things.
The National Rifle Association denied wrongdoing and claimed in court filings that James’ conduct was motivated by a “personal vendetta” against the organization, which she had referred to as a “criminal business” and a “terrorist organization” before she was elected AG. In March, a court denied James’ request to close the company, stating that her concerns might be handled through other means, such as penalties and reparations. The NRA cited Cohen’s conclusion that dissolution was an excessive punishment to support its assertions that James’ investigation was politically motivated.
