NRA Hits Back Against San Francisco's 'Domestic Terrorist Organization' Label with Lawsuit


The National Rifle Association is not backing down this week in light of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ passage of a resolution to officially label it a “domestic terrorist organization.”

According to The Associated Press, the NRA slammed the city in a lawsuit filed Monday, alleging the resolution was an unconstitutional attempt to penalize the group for protected political speech with which progressive policymakers within San Francisco disagree.

The prominent Second Amendment lobbying group will not rest until the resolution is overturned and the terror designation is removed.

“This action is an assault on all advocacy organizations across the country,” NRA lawyer William A. Brewer III told the AP. “There can be no place in our society for this manner of behavior by government officials.”

“Fortunately, the NRA, like all U.S. citizens, is protected by the First Amendment.”

Missing 17-Year-Old Girl Found Dead After 'Devastating, Mind-Blowing' Discovery Next Door Brings Months-Long Search to an End

In court filings drafted by Brewer and his team, the NRA asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to “instruct elected officials that freedom of speech means you cannot silence or punish those with whom you disagree.”

“Put simply, the government cannot discriminate against citizens based on the viewpoint of their political speech,” the suit reads.

Do you think the NRA is right to sue?

The lawsuit came less than one week after San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ unanimous passage of the resolution, which alleged the NRA was somehow directly responsible for a recent rise in gun violence, The Washington Post reported.

“The National Rifle Association spreads propaganda that misinforms and aims to deceive the public about the dangers of gun violence,” the resolution read.

Unable to point to any terrorist attacks carried out in the name of the NRA throughout U.S. history, the supervisory board vaguely alleged organizational leadership “promotes extremist positions.”

Its “considerable wealth,” the board suggested, has played a role in impeding left-wing policy prescriptions they believe would have prevented recent mass shootings.

Of course, none of these items would make the NRA a “terrorist organization” under any accepted legal definition.

US Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Landmark NRA Free Speech Case Backed by 18 States

Regardless, in light of several recent shootings, city Supervisor Catherine Stefani told the AP she’d “had enough” of the NRA.

The organization has been on the defensive in light of these shootings, with progressive Democrats nationwide coming out of the woodwork to tie the NRA to the violent acts and drag the organization through the mud in the pursuit of gun control.

In addition to fighting legal battles all over the political map and doubling down on its outreach in recent years, the NRA is also fighting serious financial strain, Business Insider reported in June.

Still, the organization refuses to take the left’s slander lying down. And NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre says that’s exactly what this legal battle signifies.

“This lawsuit comes with a message to those who attack the NRA,” LaPierre said in a statement Monday. “We will never stop fighting for our law-abiding members and their constitutional freedoms.

“Some politicians forget that all 5 million of us in the NRA stand for freedom and that we believe it is a cause worth fighting for. We will always confront illegal and discriminatory practices against our organization and the millions of members we serve,” he added.

The Western Journal reached out to the City of San Francisco for comment but did not hear back in time for publication of this article. We will update this story if and when we do hear back.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , , , , , , ,
Andrew J. Sciascia was the supervising editor of features at The Western Journal. Having joined up as a regular contributor of opinion in 2018, he went on to cover the Barrett confirmation and 2020 presidential election for the outlet, regularly co-hosting its video podcast, "WJ Live," as well.
Andrew J. Sciascia was the supervising editor of features at The Western Journal and regularly co-hosted the outlet's video podcast, "WJ Live."

Sciascia first joined up with The Western Journal as a regular contributor of opinion in 2018, before graduating with a degree in criminal justice and political science from the University of Massachusetts Lowell, where he served as editor-in-chief of the student newspaper and worked briefly as a political operative with the Massachusetts Republican Party.

He covered the Barrett confirmation and 2020 presidential election for The Western Journal. His work has also appeared in The Daily Caller.