Court Upholds NY Case Against NRA

[thallub]

The judge allowed the NY attorney general to continue the case to oust WLP and demand the appointment of an independent monitor to oversee NRA operations.

"Justice Joel Cohen allows a lawsuit by New York Attorney General Letitia James to move forward by rejecting the NRA's claim that she pursued the gun group solely out of political bias.

The NRA has failed to prove that James pursued the NRA only because of her political views, the judge ruled.

Instead, James' allegations of "fraud, waste, and looting" are enough to justify her lawsuit, regardless of her political beliefs, the judge wrote.

"There are no factual allegations suggesting that the stated concerns driving the investigation — reports of fraud, waste, and looting within the NRA — were imaginary or not believed by the Attorney General," the judge wrote.

None of the AG's claims are frivolous, Cohen added.

"In fact, the NRA itself recognized many of the same issues about corporate governance underlying the Attorney General's investigation," the judge wrote."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/co...a8306add295f8a

[44 AMP]

I think it would have been better stated if it read "allows case to proceed" or "motion to dismiss is denied", rather than "upholds case"

I'm no legal scholar so when I hear "uphold" its normally in connection with some ruling or decision.

There is no decision in the NY vs NRA case, yet. The NRA tried to get the case tossed out, the judge ruled it could proceed.

I note the linked report if from MSN, so I'll just consider the source in the choice of wording for the headline.

TO be clear, my personal opinion is that LaPierre has done us dirty and is probably guilty of at least some of the charges. I do not object to legal action against him and his cronies.

Though, I feel pretty sure the NY AG doesn't think that is enough. If I remember correctly she was calling for the disbanding (dismemberment??) of the ENTIRE NRA, and it took a judge's ruling to get her to drop that.

[HiBC]

"The appointment of an independent monitor" HMMM. By who? To serve what end?
I'm afraid I have trust issues.

At the same time, IMO,the only hope for the NRA is getting rid of WLP and disbanding the BOD.

It would be ironic if Justice Cohen and the NY AG "Drained the NRA Swamp" and allowed the NRA I remember to be restored


Somehow,I do not think that is the plan.

[thallub]

"I note the linked report if from MSN, so I'll just consider the source in the choice of wording for the headline. [/I]"

Yep, lots of folks on gun boards complain about the source of the article and badmouth the "lamestream media". Yep, lots of people on gun boards don't know to read the article byline.

A byline is simply wording that gives credit to the writer of a news story, article, or blog. It is typically found in an article between the headline and first line of the article body.

The byline started out as a method for accountability and credit, but in time it so much more.


https://www.freelancewithus.com/arti...ine%20Contains

The article's origin is Business Insider.

From Fox News:

https://fox40.com/news/national/ap-u...d-judge-rules/

[JERRYS.]

wlp shot the NRA in the foot.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

I think it would have been better stated if it read "allows case to proceed" or "motion to dismiss is denied", rather than "upholds case"

I'm no legal scholar so when I hear "uphold" its normally in connection with some ruling or decision.

I agree. This is nothing more than a procedural ruling, which determines that the case can proceed and will not be dismissed. It's not a "decision" on the merits of any aspect of the case.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

…This is nothing more than a procedural ruling, which determines that the case can proceed and will not be dismissed. It's not a "decision" on the merits of any aspect of the case….

Exactly right. There’s a lot of preliminary stuff that goes on before getting to the ultimate question of who wins the suit.

[thallub]

It's a procedural thing, never said it wasn't.

[raimius]

The NRA needs its house cleaned. It's just unfortunate that it's getting cleaned out by its enemies.

[Doc Intrepid]

+1

I've wanted to see WLP out on his ear for years.

This was not, however, the way I'd hoped it would come about.

[44 AMP]

One of the dictator's rules is, once in power, do the utmost to "rig the system" in order to stay in power.

Monarchies are "rigged" so that only the nobility gets to be in power and some go so far as only allowing certain bloodlines to hold high office and power is usually transferred by heredity.

A dictator taking over a democratic system by winning election most often goes to great lengths to see that no one else can take over the way he did. Sometimes this is done to maintain the illusion the democratic process is still in place and functioning, while changing laws and rules so that only the dictator's followers have the deciding votes.

Several nations, many with names that include "Democratic People's Republic" are actually, technically democratic republics. They have "free" elections to determine who holds which offices. There is only one party allowed and only party members (in good standing) are allowed to vote, (and its the LAW) but they do have elections.....

Sometimes that's enough, Other times/places they skip past that step and end elections entirely assuming full, and public autocratic rule.

Am not privy to the details, but from what I've heard, WLP did his version of "packing the court" so has been essentially unremovable under existing bylaws.

The laws the NY AG is using were specifically crafted for that kind of situation, where the governing body of a group was corrupt and breaking laws and the general membership could not remove them.
Those laws were made to allow the individuals charged to face the law and if found guilty be removed and punished, without punishing the entire group as a whole.

BUT, that's not all the NY AG demanded to begin with. She also demanded the entire NRA be done away with, and boasted to the press that her efforts would bring that about.

A review court shut her down pretty completely about that, but is allowing the suit against WLP and his administration as individuals, to go forward.

Or so I understand it...

[thallub]

"Am not privy to the details, but from what I've heard, WLP did his version of "packing the court" so has been essentially unremovable under existing bylaws.
"

Exactly.

Under the old BOD nominating system, do nothing board members could have eventually been replaced by members who really cared about the NRA. That all changed in 2017.

In 2017, despite numerous warnings, NRA members voted for a drastic change to the bylaws that made it nearly impossible for members to select candidates for the Board of Directors.

"- Item 8 of the bylaw changes moves to amend the section regarding nomination of directors by petition. They want to change the requirement that you get 250 signatures, to a requirement that you get a number of signatures equal to 0.5% of the votes cast in the previous election of directors. The practical effect? If more than 50,000 people voted in the previous election, you now need more signatures than the previously required 250 to get on the ballot. The NRA has over 5,000,000 members; 50,000 is 1% of that. So if more than 1% of the membership of the NRA votes, it just got harder to nominate people by petition."

A BOD member named Joaquin Jackson came before a media camera and voiced his support for an "assault weapons ban". The NRA BOD defended Jackson until he died.

https://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2...ylaw_chang.php

[Aguila Blanca]

If I recall correctly, the 2017 changes also made it functionally impossible for the rank-and-file membership to advance any changes to the by-laws.

Yes, there were warnings. Jeff Knox discussed the changes multiple times in his column in Shotgun News, and probably other places. Unfortunately, the changes passed by a substantial margin. This just tells me that a lot of the NRA membership doesn't pay any attention to what the organization is doing, they just swear blind allegiance to it. And we have seen that here on this forum. There are members of TFL who even recently have defended LaPierre and the BoD, and who have stated right out that any of us who say bad things about WLP are enemies of the Second Amendment.

Who was it who said, "There are none so blind as those who will not see"?

[natman]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

The laws the NY AG is using were specifically crafted for that kind of situation, where the governing body of a group was corrupt and breaking laws and the general membership could not remove them.
Those laws were made to allow the individuals charged to face the law and if found guilty be removed and punished, without punishing the entire group as a whole.

BUT, that's not all the NY AG demanded to begin with. She also demanded the entire NRA be done away with, and boasted to the press that her efforts would bring that about.

A review court shut her down pretty completely about that, but is allowing the suit against WLP and his administration as individuals, to go forward.

Or so I understand it...

Good summary. The NRA is correct in saying that the New York AG is politically motivated, because it's true. Fortunately, the judge saw that her demand to shut down the NRA was uncalled for.

This latest ruling is that while she may have been politically motivated, there is still sufficient evidence of wrongdoing on the NRA leadership's part to continue the case. I suspect that's true too.

[44 AMP]

Fortunately, the judge saw that her demand to shut down the NRA was uncalled for.

Uncalled for AND outside the authority of the laws she accused the NRA of violating.

(as I see it, anyway)