****UPDATE****

The NRA will not be subject to an independent monitor to oversee its non-political spending, as New York Attorney General Letitia James wanted. In fact, Judge Joel Cohen said such a monitor could pose “speech-chilling government intrusion on the affairs of the organization.”

But on Monday afternoon Cohen did impose at least one mandate on the organization: former executive vice president Wayne LaPierre is barred from holding a paid position within the group for the next ten years. 

The split decision from Judge Joel Cohen came on the final day of arguments in the second stage of the civil trial of the NRA brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Ruling from the bench, Cohen said the state’s request for a monitor was not the correct remedy, suggesting the outside oversight mechanism would be “time-consuming, disruptive and will impose significant costs on the NRA without corresponding benefits.” 

Cohen also said he had concerns about “speech-chilling government intrusion on the affairs of the organization.”

He said the same First Amendment concerns did not apply to whether LaPierre could serve anytime soon in the organization.

“This relief is about the privilege, not the right, to serve as an officer or director of a New York not-for-profit,” he said.

The Associated Press write-up doesn't contain the rest of Cohen's remarks, but Courthouse News reporter Erik Uebelacker has more details of Cohen's proposed remedies to add accountability to the organization. 

This isn't the result the AG hoped for. But despite ruling against the monitor, Judge Cohen still wants some sort of targeted relief for the parties to agree on post-trial.

He lays out these options: pic.twitter.com/xbJeETnHmZ

— Erik Uebelacker (@Uebey) July 29, 2024

At first glance, those seem like reasonable asks from Cohen. But how long will it take to come to an agreement on Cohen's suggestions, how many millions of dollars will be spent on legal fees in search of that accord, and whether the NRA can start to rebuild and regain the trust of members with more substantive reforms are all open questions.  

****Original Story Below****

Former NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre was back on the stand in a New York courtroom on Monday as Judge Joel Cohen heard testimony about whether or not he should appoint an independent monitor to oversee the group's spending. LaPierre, who was ordered to pay back more than $4 million to the NRA by a jury in an earlier trial, told Cohen that if a monitor is appointed, it will essentially be the death knell for the 153-year-old organization.

In brief testimony Monday, LaPierre described the appointment of a monitor as an existential threat to the group because it would send a message to prospective members and donors that the NRA was “being surveilled by this attorney general in New York that they think has crossed a line."

If the monitor is appointed, he said, “General James will have achieved her objective to fulfill that campaign promise of, in effect, dissolving the NRA for a lack of money and a lack of members.” 

LaPierre also told the judge that a ban on his involvement in the NRA would violate his First Amendment rights by preventing him from “being a voice for this organization in terms of its political advocacy.”

I firmly believe that New York Attorney General Letitia James launched a witch hunt against the NRA. She ran for AG on a platform of shutting down the NRA, well before she launched her official investigation. 

Unfortunately for LaPierre and other top officials, that investigation revealed real problems within the organization's leadership, which the NRA has at times admitted, and on other occasions downplayed. And it's a matter of opinion as to whether the appointment of an independent monitor would keep members away from the organization, or would reassure them that there are some outside eyeballs paying attention to the potential for further financial abuse. 

New EVP Doug Hamlin and NRA President Bob Barr have also urged Cohen to reject an independent monitor, but some reformers believe a monitor would help ensure accountability, and ultimately, "help to transform the NRA from being a big gun club (a gigantic board of directors, a president who can punish board members, finances that no one except the president’s or the EVP’s friends get to see, staff who can be fired on a whim or because they complained, etc.) into what it ought to be, a modern, organized, and powerful force for good."

While LaPierre contends that appointing a monitor would seal NRA's doom, the truth is that the NRA's declining membership and dwindling donations didn't happen simply because James launched an investigation into the group's finances. I'd say it was what she discovered that gave members a reason to freeze their donations; millions of dollars of money that should have been spent on NRA programs that was instead diverted to expensive suits, private jet charters, and other questionable expenses on the part of LaPierre and other high-level executives. 

Defending those actions in court hasn't been cheap. As The Reload's Stephen Gutowski has reported, last year the group spent more money on administrative, legal, audit, and tax expenses than its legislative, public relations, shows, and safety training programs combined. Yet, on the stand in Cohen's courtroom, Barr recently said that it's a "question" as to whether or not the NRA will try to collect the $4.4 million dollars that LaPierre owes the NRA. 

That's a huge red flag, in my opinion. How can the NRA ask members to come home and to once again financially support the organization when it hasn't even tried to claw back the millions of dollars owed to it by its former executive vice president? How can NRA leadership proclaim that all of its previous problems with accountability and transparency have been resolved when its current president maintains that LaPierre was acting in good faith the entire time he was at the helm? 

Ideally, I too would prefer to see the NRA manage its financial affairs without an outside monitor looking over its shoulder. Unfortunately, despite the steps NRA members and some directors have taken to truly reform the organization, those efforts are still very much a work in progress, and appear to be meeting with resistance from some of the old guard who are still in positions of power and influence. In the end, that might be all that Judge Cohen needs to appoint a special monitor to oversee the NRA's non-political spending.

***Editors Note***

After this story published, I became aware that Bob Barr had emailed board members about the uncollected money a jury says Wayne LaPierre owes the NRA. Barr contends "no board officer, including myself, has ever suggested the NRA would not seek to recover any final awards owed to the NRA by individual defendants."

At trial, I testified that I assumed the NRA was still finalizing its plans in this regard. My full testimony (conveniently not publicized via “X” and other social media platforms) explained this is because no final awards have yet been confirmed, and the NYAG bears the responsibility to pursue the recoveries in question. The NYAG is responsible for securing the awards because of her standing as the plaintiff in these proceedings. The NRA, of course, is committed to holding the NYAG’s feet to the fire and pursuing every dollar to which it is entitled, period.

Courthouse News reporter Erik Uebelacker was in the courtroom when Barr was on the stand, and reported Barr's comment about the undecided status of seeking the money owed by LaPierre. 

Bob Barr just said the NRA hasn't determined whether it will actually try to collect the $4.4 million Wayne LaPierre owes pursuant to the jury verdict against him.

"That does remain in question," Barr said.

— Erik Uebelacker (@Uebey) July 16, 2024