Quote:
|
Chris W. Cox (the deputy director of the ILA and heir apparent after Wayne LaPierre) has taken charge of the litigation goals of the NRA and, in my own opinion, doesn't know what the hell he is doing. As a lobbyist, he is good. Very, very good. As a litigator, quite simply, he sucks. He has no concept of civil rights litigation and what that entails. The attorneys at his disposal are very good litigators, if somewhat inexperienced in civil rights litigation. However, Mr. Cox will not let them do their job. His ego will not allow for anything less than full involvement with the cases (with the exception of some CA cases).
|
I agree with most of this. The NRA-ILA is an excellent lobbying organization, but they're mediocre at best when it comes to litigation. To be fair, however, it was the NRA rather than the SAF that argued for incorporation under the Due Process clause rather than the Privleages and Immunities clause in
McDonald. As we know, SCOTUS went with the former rather than the latter though they may have done that anyway even had the NRA not been involved.
That being said, I support the ILA for their lobbying expertise rather than their litigation expertise. The way I see it, the NRA-ILA is our first line of defense against new gun control as they're best when fighting legislatively. The SAF, to which I also belong and support, is the second line of defense should the ILA fail because they're quite adept at fighting with litigation. I would be tickled pink if the NRA would form a separate branch, independant of Cox, for litigation.