The NRA is Getting Legal Help From…The ACLU?!

Well, this is a shocker.

But hey, whenever you see a progressive actually being ideologically consistent, as in, standing up for the liberty of people they disagree with, it’s worthy of mention.

Even if they’re mostly doing so out of self-interest…that’s kind of the whole point of American liberty. We defend everyone’s individual rights for the sake of our own.

Notice: The WPP_Query class has been deprecated since 5.0.0. Please use \WordPressPopularPosts\Query instead. in /www/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-popular-posts/src/deprecated.php on line 43

Trending: Ted Cruz Goes Nuclear On Activists After They Call State Troopers ‘State-Sanctioned Violence:’ ‘Stop Demonizing The Police’

It’s been working well, more or less, for 200-some-odd years right?

Here’s what’s going down:

The NRA is currently engaged in a legal battle with the Attorney General of New York, who is trying to indirectly target them by punishing the corporations or financial institutions that do business with them.

You know, David Hogg’s whole thing. So yeah…the Attorney General of New York is apparently has an awful lot in common ideologically with an uppity 18-year-old who spent the better part of his senior year camped out in front of a CNN green screen.

Anyway, the ACLU has, shockingly, stepped in on behalf of the NRA because they realized that, as a controversial advocacy group that works with other controversial advocacy groups, if New York’s AG is successful, it could be bad news for them or their progressive buddies in states that don’t care so much for their brand of advocacy.

The Daily Wire reports:

Initially the NRA argued that it would suffer severe financial damage because of New York’s rules, but later, the Texas Public Policy foundation, arguing on behalf of the NRA, suggested that New York’s efforts actually impacted the NRA’s First Amendment rights.

In their amicus brief, the ACLU agreed, arguing that New York’s rule “‘would set a dangerous precedent for advocacy groups,’ no matter their viewpoint, because public officials would be encouraged to use their regulatory power against the ‘disfavored.'”

Although the ACLU never mentions gun violence (it’s official line on the subject is that the Second Amendment lists a “collective” rather than an “individual” right) they are clear that while one state may see the NRA as an insidious group, another state — or even New York under another governor — could use the power to target groups today’s New York government doesn’t oppose, like Planned Parenthood, or even the ACLU itself.

Arguments in the case are ongoing, but a verdict is expected soon.

Well, isn’t that nice?

See, if we could all just realize that constitutional rights for one are constitutional rights for all, perhaps we’d be bickering a lot less and doing a lot more of minding-our-own-business-while-we-do-America-right..ing.

Just a thought.