Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the National Rifle Association’s free speech rights were violated when the top financial regulator for New York State pushed banks and insurance companies to sever ties with them.

The opinion wasn’t just unanimous, it was written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, not one of the “usual” 2A supporters. But her opinion wasn’t about the mission of the NRA, it was about the organization’s “plausible allegation” that the New York regulators violated the First Amendment.

“The critical takeaway,” Justice Sotomayor wrote, “is that the First Amendment prohibits government officials from wielding their power selectively to punish or suppress speech, directly or (as alleged here) through private intermediaries.”

“Government officials,” she wrote, “cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors.”

The majority opinion said officials could criticize the NRA and pursue violations of New York’s state insurance laws. The First Amendment violation occurred when the Commissioner wielded her power “to threaten enforcement actions against DFS-regulated entities in order to punish or suppress the NRA’s gun-promotion advocacy. Because the complaint plausibly alleges that Vuollo (the commissioner) did just that, the court holds that the NRA stated a First Amendment violation.”

For the NRA, this represents the first high-profile court win in quite a while. Most of the NRA's courthouse news has been repeated finding of fault by the organization under the “leadership” of longtime former EVP/CEO Wayne LaPierre.

The NRA’s annual meeting in Dallas, Texas, signaled what reformers describe as the first concrete proof that the NRA is, in fact, changing for the better. The changes made in an open Board of Directors meeting, they say, reflect the desire of its membership that the organization return to its core missions.

The biggest evidence of change came in the form of the defeat of the heretofore near-automatic confirmations of the choices of the nominating committee for senior slots in the organization’s Board and senior management.

Doug Hamlin, the newly-elected Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Rifle Association. NRA Photo.

The big upset was the nomination from the floor and selection of Doug Hamlin, the longtime head of NRA Publications, to the Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer’s slot. Hamlin beat out longtime industry figure and successful business executive, Ronnie Barrett.

For twenty-three years, I have been routinely denied any interview with the EVP/CEO. In what I consider the first tangible sign of change that I’ve seen, I was given an opportunity to interview Doug Hamlin. I did not turn the opportunity down. As it turns out, it’s the first of what will likely be a series of interviews as Hamlin moves the NRA from behind its longstanding veil of secrecy to a transparent, accountable management style.

You can read the entire interview in today’s edition of QA Outdoors, but the conversation in its transcribed format doesn’t convey the tone of the conversation. Hamlin wasn’t just open and willing to talk, he was eager to share the vision for what he reluctantly called “NRA 2.0”.

I started with a simple question: Are the changes at the NRA HQ the start of the next 153 years of the NRA or a continuation of the last five years of the NRA?

“We’re going to reposition ourselves,” Hamlin said, “we’re going to create more op-ed material and put it in places in the mainstream media, places we where we did not engage in the past. The objective is to ‘make us the good guys.’ I mean, you look at the NRA members over the last 153 years and we’re blue collar folks like my parents, military veterans like myself…we have jobs, families, we’re community leaders.”

“We don’t talk about that enough. So the objective Is to put that in display in our messaging, and our brand and places where we haven’t been.”

“We have to retool this thing,” he said, “but we have to make ourselves available in the mainstream, too, and welcome back the folks who have been dissatisfied based on the billions of dollars and anti-NRA publicity that’s been focused against us the past five years.”

Unfortunately, some of that anti-NRA publicity has been self-created. And the result? An organization with reduced membership and seriously constrained finances.

I asked Hamlin -directly- what’s the financial status of the NRA?

His answer was equally direct.

“I will say upfront,” he said “we’re gonna make it. But this is a crisis management situation. I won’t sugarcoat it. I’ve been in business as CEO at a lot of different places for a lot of years and this is a classic turnaround.”

“But,” he said, “we have the brand, and the staff that’s completely into it. They want to win…they just need leadership.”

“I have a great staff around me,” he said, “they just need leadership….I have not slept a lot in the past 10 days, and I’m not looking for sympathy, just telling the truth. There’s so much to do..”

A lot of that “to do” list involves cleaning up the messes created by his successor. Messes that Hamlin, unfortunately, can’t discuss due to “legal constraints.”

What he could discuss was pretty interesting -and speaks to the plans for the “NRA 2.0”-including his having approached most, if not all, of the people who were “purged” in 2019 for daring to challenge LaPierre’s actions and activities.

“I’ve talked with many of them already,” he said, “and to a person they’ve all volunteered to come back and support the organization any way they can. They love the N.R.A.”

But what about the grassroots? What, I asked, can you say-and do- to convince them to reengage -especially in the light of the profligate spending that was acknowledged in the New York trials?

“I took this job for no additional compensation,” he said, “and I’ll just say that part of the reason we got into trouble is maybe didn’t have the sophistication we needed -because we hadn’t hired the right managers. We paid all that money and maybe we didn’t get the return in terms of the situation we ended up in.”

“But,” he said, “we learned a lot with regard to mistakes made, we’re not going to make those mistakes again. I’m going to be watching very carefully.” He also promises to run a lean, tight organization.

Can Hamlin and NRA 2.0 regain the trust of currently disenfranchised former members, an industry that has quietly campaigning for a “housecleaning” at the NRA -and, most importantly, convince a New York judge the self-correction steps are enough to avoid the organization being placed under outside supervision?

No ready answers - but the reasons Hamlin believes the need for the N.R.A. is more critical than ever speak to the overall state of the country. You can read his comments and decide for yourself in today’s edition of QA Outdoors.

As always, we’ll keep you posted.

—Jim Shepherd