NEW YORK (AP) – New York Attorney General’s lawsuit against National Rifle Association is not a mere “witch hunt,” a New York judge ruled Friday in dismissing claims by the gun rights group that the case is a political revenge.
Manhattan Judge Joel M. Cohen’s decision means the nearly 2-year legal battle may continue.
The ruling comes after mass shootings last month in New York and Texas revived the U.S. arms policy debate and refocused attention on the NRA.
The New York case began when James, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit accusing some senior ANR executives of financial failure and attempting to dissolve the group. The Attorney General’s job includes overseeing the nonprofits incorporated in New York, where the NRA was formed in 1871.
In March, Cohen turned down James’ offer to close the NRA. But the judge allowed the case to continue, with the possibility of fines or other appeals if imposed by the Attorney General.
The NRA accused James in a court appearance last year of conducting “a blatant and malicious campaign of retaliation” because of his views. The group tried to stop the lawsuit.
Cohen rejected these arguments.
“The narration that the Attorney General’s investigation into these undeniably serious matters was nothing more than a witch hunt for political and unconstitutional reasons is simply not supported by the record,” he wrote, noting that the investigation was provoked by reports of misconduct and “discovered additional evidence”.
James applauded the decision, saying it confirms the “legitimacy and viability” of the lawsuit.
“Our struggle for transparency and accountability will continue,” he said in a statement.
NRA attorney William A. Brewer III said the group was disappointed but would continue to fight the case and still believes it was an unfair goal.
“The ANR believes the NYAG’s investigation was driven by its opposition to the association and its First Amendment activities in support of the Second Amendment,” it said in a statement, using an abbreviation of the prosecutor’s title. general.
Following the recent shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, Congress is under renewed pressure to respond after years of partisan attacks on gun legislation.
The House has passed bills that would raise the age limit for buying semi-automatic weapons and establish “red-flag” federal laws that allow people with a high risk of harming themselves or others to take up arms. These initiatives have traditionally failed in the Senate.
Democratic and Republican senators have been talking about a framework to address the issue, but no agreement has been announced.
The ANR, a long-standing political force that has lost some influence in the midst of financial scandals in recent years, has long insisted that mass shootings are no reason to limit access to weapons, arguing that the solution is that law-abiding people have firearms to defend themselves. themselves and others.
The message was echoed at the group’s convention in Houston last month, days after a gunman killed 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde.
Demonstrations are expected to call for significant changes to gun laws in Washington and around the country this weekend and are expected to attract tens of thousands of people.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is also caught up in the national tug-of-war over the weapons site in America. Judges are expected to soon issue their verdict on more consistent weapons in more than a decade, which could make it easier for them to be armed on the streets of New York and other major cities.