NRA Files Amicus Brief Supporting Firearm Manufacturers

by
posted on January 16, 2025
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
NRA ILA Logo

NRA filed an amicus brief supporting firearm manufacturers in a case where the plaintiffs allege that the manufacturers’ pro-Second Amendment social media posts caused a third party to commit a horrific public shooting.

The firearm manufacturers regularly post pro-Second Amendment content on social media. These posts often contain imagery of firearms, individuals in military gear, and tactical equipment, and express support for the right to keep and bear arms.

After an individual used various firearms—some of which were manufactured by the defendants in this case—in a crime, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit claiming that the manufacturers’ social media posts influenced the shooter to act.

NRA’s brief focuses on certain First Amendment aspects of the case. The plaintiffs claim, in essence, that the manufacturers’ social media posts are not protected by the First Amendment because they are either (1) commercial speech or (2) incitement to violence. NRA’s brief explains that the social media posts are not commercial speech because their primary purpose is to advocate for the Second Amendment, not to facilitate a commercial transaction. And either way, the plaintiffs’ attempt to censor the posts is viewpoint discrimination based on the pro-Second Amendment views expressed in their posts, which presumptively violates the First Amendment.

Moreover, the manufacturers’ posts did not incite the shooter to commit violence. There is nothing sinister about the militaristic imagery in the posts. Rather, there has always been a synergistic connection between military, law enforcement, and the right to keep and bear arms.

At its core, this is a case where the plaintiffs are trying to censor the manufacturers because they disagree with their message. But the manufacturers have a right to speak (or post) in support of the Second Amendment, and the plaintiffs cannot violate the First Amendment to stop them from doing so.

The case, Lowy v. Daniel Defense, is currently before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Stay tuned to nraila.org for future updates.

Latest

Trail Cam Lede
Trail Cam Lede

How To Use Trail Cameras to Find More Bucks and Bulls

Get some tips from Scott Haugen on how to optimize your trail cam grid this season.

New for 2025: Davidson's Exclusive Bergara B-14 FSP Hunter Stainless

Davidson’s has collaborated with Bergara to produce the first complete Bergara rifle with a stainless-steel barreled action available in the USA.

New for 2025: Leica USA Rangemaster CRF Max

Leica Sport Optics USA has unveiled the Leica Rangemaster CRF Max. Designed for hunters and long-range shooters who demand precision and reliability, the CRF Max combines Leica’s optical performance with cutting-edge digital integration and a new heads-up display.

Boone and Crockett Club Poaching Data Published

Did you know that the majority of wildlife violations never result in citations? Sure, with so much ground to cover, it may be easy to guess that most violations committed deep in the backcountry will never see the light of day, but the scale is still quite surprising. 

First Look: Horizon Firearms Exclusive

Custom & Collectable Firearms proudly unveils the Horizon Firearms Exclusive, a 1-of-50 limited series built for hunters and anyone who values accuracy, value and dependability.

Boone & Crockett and Pope & Young Now Accepting Javelina Entries

The Boone and Crockett Club (B&C) and Pope and Young Club (P&Y) announced in August that they have completed scoring procedures and are now accepting entries for javelina (collared peccary, Pecari tajacu) in their record books.

Interests



Get the best of American Hunter delivered to your inbox.