October Term 2023 · Docket 22-842
Can regulators pressure insurers to drop disfavored clients?
The NRA claims New York regulators coerced insurers into dropping its business. The state argues it only urged risk management.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official Court opinion was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
David Cole argued that regulators cannot add threats to requests for non-support.
Molly McDowell stated that officials may criticize speech but not threaten adverse action.
Nikhil Katyal countered that the insurers and NRA broke insurance laws by operating without licenses.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 51-1 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 51-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 49-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 49-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-53 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-39
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the limits of government power over private speech. The NRA seeks a ruling that regulators cannot threaten action to silence critics. New York defends its authority to manage financial risks.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 18, 2024.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 17-19
What each side wants
The NRA wants the Court to strike down the regulator's conduct as unconstitutional coercion.
New York wants the Court to uphold the regulator's authority to manage reputational risks.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
What each side says
The NRA argues regulators cannot use regulatory threats to force private parties to penalize disfavored speakers.
New York argues regulators may urge companies to assess reputational risks without violating the First Amendment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
What the justices asked
Justice Barrett asked if the NRA seeks new legal ground.
Justice Jackson asked how coercion leads to a First Amendment violation here.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 51-1 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 51-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 49-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 49-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-53 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-39
Why it matters
This dispute defines the boundary between government persuasion and coercion. It determines whether regulators can pressure private entities to drop clients based on speech. The outcome shapes future interactions between state agencies and private businesses.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 19-45 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 19-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-33 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-45 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-51 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 51-1 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 51-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 9-13 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 9-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-39 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 49-53 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 49-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 49-13 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 49-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 51-53 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 51-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-53 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 7-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 7-39
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 41-37 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 41-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 55-53 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 55-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 81, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 81, lines 23-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.