The US Supreme Court has agreed to review National Rifle Association (NRA) claims that a former New York state official unconstitutionally pressured insurance companies, including Chubb Ltd. and Lloyd's of London, to cease business operations with the gun lobby. The NRA's allegations of "blacklisting" were previously dismissed by a federal appeals court, which stated that it did not violate the organization's free speech rights. However, the Supreme Court's decision to review the case now opens up the possibility of reviving the NRA's claims.

The lawsuit, which also lists former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as a defendant, alleges that the former Department of Financial Services Superintendent, Maria Vullo, targeted the NRA's "Carry Guard" insurance program, which covers losses associated with the use of personal firearms, including criminal defense costs. The NRA claims that Vullo then extended her pressure to other insurance products endorsed by the organization, threatening the companies with investigations and penalties if they did not sever ties with the gun-rights group.

According to the NRA's appeal, the ruling by the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals grants regulators the ability to selectively target unpopular speakers in the name of addressing social and environmental issues, thereby compromising the freedom of speech. The NRA further points to guideline letters and a press release issued by Vullo, where she urged insurers to consider the risk to their reputations if they continued to work with the NRA. These documents were released following the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

In response, Vullo's lawyers argue that she did not violate the First Amendment's protections by expressing her views on a national tragedy and urging regulated entities to reconsider their relationships with gun-promotion organizations. They have urged the Supreme Court to reject the NRA's appeal, suggesting that the case does not present a clear-cut legal issue for the justices to resolve.

The Supreme Court's consideration of this case, titled National Rifle Association v. Vullo, 22-842, brings attention to the constitutional implications of governmental influence on private entities in connection with the gun control debate. The outcome of this review will be closely watched by both sides of the gun rights debate, as it has the potential to set an important precedent regarding the limits of government involvement in private business operations.