Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Letitia James]]>

In Scathing Letter, Firearms Policy Coalition Promises to Take NY AG Letitia James Up on Her 'We'll See You in Court' Offer

by Leave a Comment

It hasn’t been a great week for progressive statists, who are learning that the Constitution doesn’t grant them the broad powers they thought it did — and that activists judges have allowed for too long. Like cornered animals, they’re wildly flailing and lashing out.

The meltdown started after the United States Supreme Court struck down New York’s concealed carry law one week ago, ruling that “New York’s ‘proper cause’ requirement to obtain a concealed-carry license violates the Constitution by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense.” Of course, that did not make New York Attorney General Letitia James very happy, and she promised to “do something.”

On Wednesday, the recently-smacked-down AG did something, announcing a lawsuit against 10 companies that sell unfinished firearms components, accusing them of being “gun distributors…selling weapons to felons and others without a background check” and blaming them for flooding New York’s streets with “illegal ghost guns that harmed New Yorkers.” New York City Mayor Eric Adams filed his own federal lawsuit against five of the same companies.

Because, as we all know, gang bangers are spending their spare time manufacturing their own guns from frames and receivers. You know, because that takes no specialized skill or equipment.

Just kidding. If they made their own guns, those guns would most likely misfire and be completely dangerous.

James’ lawsuit is partially based on the invocation of the Public Nuisance law:

Attorney General James brings six claims against the distributors and invokes the Public Nuisance law for the first time. Under the Public Nuisance claim, Attorney General James asserts that these distributors have endangered the safety and health of the public by selling and bringing dangerous and illegal products into New York and by failing to adopt reasonable controls and procedures to prevent their products from falling into improper hands.

In James’ press conference she told those who believe her lawsuit is based on political animus and not the law that she’d see them in court. One Second Amendment advocacy group, Firearms Policy Coalition, responded to James (and Adams) in a letter Thursday morning, warning that she should drop the lawsuits or that they, indeed, would see her in court.

The letter is a work of art, and must be read in its entirety.

Dearest Attorney General James and Mayor Adams,

Your respective related lawsuits directed against ten private purveyors of lawful products have come to our attention. It appears you are seeking to use an over-broad New York regulatory scheme, combined with a tortured and incorrect reading of federal law, to unconstitutionally and immorally steal the profits and livelihoods of individuals across this nation. We felt it might be helpful to remind you of your place.

For one—and this might take you by surprise—the truth is that you simply cannot control the actions of people that are not subject to your respective jurisdictions.

These lawsuits are brought against groups of honest, hard-working people who have complied with federal law, and the law of their jurisdictions. Just as we cannot force you to remember our birthday, you cannot force people outside of your jurisdiction to play by your rules. There is simply no power to do so in either instance.

We understand that, for a time, New York City was the de-facto capital of this nation. We’re sure this is an immense point of pride, but that temporary honor ended in 1790. Two-hundred and thirty-two years ago. It’s time to let go.

With it established that you are neither Attorney General nor Mayor (nor Premiere), respectively, of this nation, we must further remind you that you cannot rewrite nearly a thousand years of common law precedent by simply deeming conduct a “public nuisance” with the stroke of a pen. It may have some effect in your back yard, but not in ours.

In your June 29 press conference, you responded to a reasonable concern that your lawsuits were based neither in fact or law, but merely political animus, by smugly stating “see you in court.” Many would call this bullying, and find it unbecoming of public officials. We, on the other hand, very much enjoy standing up to bullies like you. And States and municipalities don’t get to opt out of the Constitution. With that said, you should end your assault on fundamental rights and property now—before we “see you in court” and a federal court once again reminds you of your place.

Hoo boy.

The letter is signed by FPC’s policy counsel, Matthew Larosiere. FPC’s not the type of organization to issue such a warning and not follow up, so what comes next should be interesting.

Donald Trump Scores Win Against Letitia James' New York Witch-Hunt

by Leave a Comment

Donald Trump scored a victory on Wednesday in New York against Letitia James’ witch-hunt “investigation” into the former president’s business dealings. Back in late April, Trump was held in contempt by a judge handling the case for supposedly not turning over requested documents.

That ruling has now been lifted, according to CBS News.

A New York judge ruled Wednesday that Donald Trump is no longer in contempt for failing to turn over documents demanded in a subpoena by the state’s attorney general.

The former president’s April 25 contempt finding came after he contested a December subpoena seeking records related to his personal finances and the financing of several properties. Trump claimed he had no material that was responsive to the subpoena, leading to demands by the judge and the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James that his attorneys provide detailed explanations of how they conducted their search.

“Although we are pleased that the court has lifted the contempt finding, we maintain that it was wholly unwarranted and improper in the first place,” Alina Habba, an attorney for Trump, said in a text message. “We will push ahead with our appeal to secure justice for our client.”

Apparently, the judge was satisfied with Trump’s assertion (and the assertions of his associates) that he simply doesn’t have the documents James wants. Multiple members of the president’s organization filed affidavits explaining a lack of centralized organization for records. Trump himself filed one that stated that he typically delegates such work to underlings, which makes perfect sense.

That doesn’t mean Trump’s organization doesn’t keep any financial records, but it does mean they don’t have any specific policy to keep random documents related directly to Trump. James, being the leftwing hack she is, is obviously fishing for dirt on the former president, and according to the report, is none too happy with that development.

Trump’s lawyers seemed to troll James a bit in turning over some handwritten notes from Trump, though.

Trump attorney Alina Habba noted in a June 8 letter to the court that “a vast number” of documents showing Trump’s “handwritten notes” had been turned over by the Trump Organization. Habba’s letter was accompanied by eight exhibits that include several photos of the golf legend Gary Player, on which Trump had written “Great,” as well as several legal and design documents in which he wrote “OK.” There was also a note from his daughter on a planning document related to a Trump property in Doral, Florida.

I’m sure writing “great” on the picture of a golf player will serve as damning evidence for James’ pursuits. Conversely, there’s just nothing really here to find, and that’s the problem with witch-hunts. They begin with a conclusion and then bad-faith actors have to try to backfill the evidence to fit that conclusion. There was never any basis for James to investigate Trump’s business dealings. Rather, the entire thing was her simply continuing the partisan pursuit she started while she was campaigning to become attorney general. She promised to take down Trump, and this is her way of trying to deliver, facts need not apply.

I won’t claim to know how exactly this is going to turn out, but I suspect it won’t amount to much. I guess we’ll find out, but it doesn’t seem as if Trump is too worried about it.

NRA loses bid to end New York AG suit seeking LaPierre's removal

by Leave a Comment

New York Attorney General Letitia James definitely had it in for the National Rifle Association before she ever assumed office. As a candidate, she called the group a “terrorist organization” and vowed to launch an investigation into the New York-charted group if elected. That was one promise she was happy to fulfill, and her investigation and case against the NRA has gone on for three years now.

James vowed to dissolve the organization as well, but she was prevented from doing so by the judge overseeing the case against the NRA, who declared earlier this year that while the Attorney General has laid out plenty of details of “greed, self-dealing, and lax financial oversight”, she failed to prove that of that actually benefitted the group itself and not individual leaders and higher-ups in the group. It was inappropriate to shut down the group itself, ruled Justice Joel Cohen, but James could continue her case with an eye towards removing the NRA’s leadership.

The NRA objected to Cohen’s decision, arguing that James had launched her investigation solely because of her bias against the group and asking that the judge throw out the James’ modified complaint, but on Friday, Cohen issued a ruling that allows James to move forward in trying to ban CEO and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and three others from ever holding a position within the NRA, as well as installing an independent monitor to oversee the group’s books.

The NRA has failed to prove that James pursued the NRA only because of her political views, the judge ruled.

Instead, James’ allegations of “fraud, waste, and looting” are enough to justify her lawsuit, regardless of her political beliefs, the judge wrote.

“There are no factual allegations suggesting that the stated concerns driving the investigation — reports of fraud, waste, and looting within the NRA — were imaginary or not believed by the Attorney General,” the judge wrote.

None of the AG’s claims are frivolous, Cohen added.

“In fact, the NRA itself recognized many of the same issues about corporate governance underlying the Attorney General’s investigation,” the judge wrote.

LaPierre’s control of the NRA has been challenged internally as well, but the 76-member Board of Directors has solidly stood behind him over the last few years. Allen West’s attempt to become Executive Vice President during the recent Annual Meetings resulted in him getting just one vote, with another seven board members abstaining, and more than 50 votes cast in favor of retaining LaPierre in his current position.

While Cohen was careful to note in his opinion that James has yet to prove all of her claims, he did call them “objectively well-founded”, and, as noted above, pointed out that even the NRA itself “recognized many of the same issues about corporate governance underlying the Attorney General’s investigation.”

Within the NRA, whistleblowers “push[ed] for additional documentation and transparency,” an effort which was “met with resistance from a handful of its executives and vendors”. One executive “was fired by the NRA for many of the same issues alleged in the Complaint,” while the group “became embroiled in litigation” against others who “abused its trust”. And in this action, current NRA members have sought leave to intervene to address “concerns . . . about the NRA’s management by the Individual Defendants and current Board”.

Further, when the NRA sought to evade the Attorney General’s actions in New York by filing for bankruptcy in Texas, the federal bankruptcy court there underscored concerns about the NRA’s corporate governance. For example, the bankruptcy court noted “the surreptitious manner in which [Wayne] LaPierre obtained and exercised authority to file bankruptcy for the NRA,” finding the decision to “[e]xclude[] so many people from the process of deciding to file for bankruptcy, including the vast majority of the board of directors, the chief financial officer, and the general counsel, . . . nothing less than shocking”. The court also alluded to “cringeworthy facts” about the NRA’s past misconduct. It found “[s]ome of the conduct that gives the Court concern is still ongoing,” including “very recent[ ] violat[ions]” of the NRA’s internal procedures and “lingering issues of secrecy and a lack of transparency”.

Cohen went on to say that “[i]n the end, an objectively reasonable investigation – here, one uncovering credible evidence of wrongdoing – is not rendered unconstitutional solely by the investigator’s subjective state of mind,” declaring that even if James had a personal animus against the NRA, the organization hasn’t demonstrated “a sufficient causal link between the animus and the adverse action”; in this case, the original lawsuit filed by James to dissolve the NRA and the revised complaint seeking his (and others) removal from the organization.

There’s still plenty of legal wrangling to be done (and millions of dollars in legal expenses for the organization to be billed) before this case goes to trial, likely some time next year, but I doubt that Cohen’s ruling is going to be overturned on appeal.

I do believe that James’ original motivation was more of a fishing expedition than anything else, but unfortunately for the NRA and its leadership, what she found can’t be as easily dismissed by Justice Cohen as her attempt to dissolve the organization was.

LaPierre overwhelmingly re-elected as NRA head by board members

by Leave a Comment

The outcome of the “reformers’” (or “internal enemies’” depending on who you’re talking to) attempt to unseat NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre was never really in doubt; the question was how many votes would challenger Allen West receive from the 76 members of the NRA Board of Directors.

At Monday’s board meeting, which was closed to the general press but open to NRA members, 62 of those 76 board members were on hand for the vote, and the vast majority of them cast their vote in favor of the status quo. Only one board member voted for West, with 54 directors voting to keep LaPierre and seven others abstaining. That’s even less than the two votes that former NRA board member Rocky Marshall received when he challenged LaPierre’s leadership at the 2021 board meeting.

Frank Tait, one of the “reformers/internal enemies” who has unsuccessfully run for the NRA board in previous elections, said afterwards that he wasn’t surprised at the lopsided nature of the vote, but warned that New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit against the NRA could still lead to a federal judge replacing LaPierre on his own if and when the case goes to trial. That’s not expected to happen until next year, however, and Tait says that unless there is a widespread effort on the part of rank-and-file members to push board members to replace LaPierre, any efforts at internal reform aren’t likely to succeed.

“I would say right now I’m very disappointed in where things are and I need to reflect on where we go from here,” said Tait shortly after the board meeting concluded. “The only hope seems to be Judge Cohen in New York, who took the dissolution of the organization off the table and will hopefully put the structure in place that will allow the organization to grow and refocus on its core mission.”

For the most part, the portions of the board meeting not held in executive session were uneventful, but there were a few other notes of interest:

  • The official attendance figure announced by NRA President Charles Cotton was 61,254; down substantially from the 80,000+ members who attended the convention pre-pandemic, and the lowest attendance figure since the 2006 Annual Meetings in Milwaukee. Cotton noted that the conference being held over the Memorial Day likely led to some folks staying home, but also acknowledged that the shooting in Uvalde, Texas just days before the convention began likely kept some members and would-be attendees from showing up at the George R. Brown Convention Center
  • Cotton spoke about a preliminary report from the “Relocation Committee” that’s investigating moving the NRA’s headquarters from Fairfax, Virginia to another part of the country. According to Cotton, a feasibility study conducted on behalf of the committee determined that the best site for a potential relocation was “north Texas,” though no specific city was cited.
  • NRA’s Director of General Operations Joseph DeBergalis was asked by former NRA President Sandra Froman about the status of the organization’s School Shield program, which was launched after the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary in 2012. The program has been basically on ice since 2019, but DeBergalis says he’d like to not only bring the program back but expand it to become a “Community Shield” program that would also address security at places like shopping malls and churches.

Though the NRA Annual Meetings have concluded, we have plenty of more coverage to come once I’m back on the ground in Virginia. The most immediate test of the group’s strength is already underway as a bipartisan group of senators works to craft some type of compromise legislation on gun control; most likely something to do with background check bills. One final note from the board meeting; NRA-ILA executive director Jason Ouimet told board members that it’s very likely that Joe Biden’s second choice for ATF Director will win Senate approval. Former U.S. Attorney and failed Democratic candidate for Ohio Attorney General Steve Dettelbach is likely to win confirmation, with Sen. Angus King of Maine announcing his support for the anti-gun politician last week.

The rage mob comes for a New York gun store

by Leave a Comment

So far, there’s no indication that the suspect in the Buffalo shooting was prohibited from purchasing a firearm, but that’s not stopping a flood of outrage from being directed at the small gun shop in upstate New York where the 18-year old bought a Bushmaster rifle.

Robert Donald, the owner of Vintage Firearms in Endicott, New York, told the New York Post that he doesn’t recall details of the transaction, but that if any red flags had popped up, either in a background check or his interactions with the suspect, he wouldn’t have proceeded with the sale.

“He didn’t stand out,” he said of the teen. “Because if he did, I would’ve never sold him the gun.

“I don’t understand why an 18-year-old would even do this,” Donald said. “I know I didn’t do anything wrong, but I feel terrible about it.”

The rage mob doesn’t care about Donald’s feelings. Or rather, no matter how terrible he may feel, they want him feel even worse.

The Vintage Firearms Facebook page is now filled with comments from people accusing Donald of being complicit in the Buffalo massacre because he sold the firearm Gendron used.

“You sell assault weapons to teenagers. You sell weapons to violent White supremacists. You enabled this,” one commenter said.

“You trade in death. I hope it haunts you for the rest of your life,” another said.

… A sign in front of his shop said Vintage Firearms would be closed until May 22, but it didn’t indicate if that was a planned closure or if it was prompted by Saturday’s shooting.

Again, there’s no indication whatsoever that Donald did anything illegal or even inappropriate with the gun sale, but logic isn’t exactly the rage mob’s strong suit. If New York wanted to try to ban gun sales to under-21s, for example, Democrats could have easily included that in the 2013 SAFE Act, which did impose a ban on various features of modern sporting rifles while imposing registration requirements on all gun owners.

And we may very well see New York Democrats try to impose such a ban now, though whether or not any age restriction will be upheld by the courts in New York is another story. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul will be unveiling several new gun control proposals today, and while the original impetus for the legislation is the Supreme Court’s pending decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Hochul is almost certain to announce a bill or two that’s designed as a response to the shooting in Buffalo as well.

Hochul had scheduled the gun control announcement before the Buffalo shooting. The governor, speaking at a briefing over the weekend in Buffalo, said Saturday’s incident makes it more important than ever to close loopholes in New York’s laws.

“We are doing everything we can to ensure that our laws are tight, they’re ironclad, to ensure that our law enforcement have the resources they need,” Hochul said.

Hochul told reporters that she wants to expand the state’s existing ban on some assault weapons to include what are called AOWs, or any other weapon. She said some of these guns are functionally assault weapons.

… Hochul said Tuesday’s announcement will also include changes that could be made to New York’s laws to address an expected ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court that could strike down New York’s restrictions on carrying a concealed weapon.

While New York gun owners and Second Amendment advocates brace for another attack on their right to keep and bear arms, the owner of Vintage Firearms also has to be concerned with a gun control law that’s already on the books in the state. Shortly before resigning in disgrace, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed legislation empowering citizens and the state’s Attorney General to sue gun makers and gun sellers when a firearm is used in a crime. This attempt to hold the firearms industry financially responsible for the actions of criminals by using the state’s public nuisance law as an end run around the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act will almost certainly be directed not only at the company that made the Bushmaster rifle sold to the suspect (Remington sold the brand as part of its bankruptcy proceedings in September of 2020), but to the store that made the sale as well. Whether or not the law is upheld after its first legal test remains to be seen, but if the rage mob doesn’t put Donald out of business, my guess is New York Attorney General Letitia James and a posse of gun control groups will try to finish the job in court.