NRA, NY State, Banking, First Amendment NRA, NY State, Banking, First Amendment

Unedited Transcript

00:00

Every Business Must be concerned about upsetting not a whole government agency. But just one rogue person with a bone to pick. The legal authority to occupy a position does not give one the legal authority to interfere in trade. Here is Paul Truesdell regarding the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding the NRA in the state of New York, think about it. What if your business had to deal with unlawful government intimidation,

00:26

there is a concerning issue that very few people have talked about. And that is a case that went before the United States Supreme Court that was decided last week regarding the National Rifle Association. And believe it or not, the case was unanimous, and Justice Sotomayor, err, wrote that the state of New York violated the First Amendment right of the National Rifle Association, when it overtly and aggressively urged banks and insurance companies to cut ties with the gun rights group. The NRA filed this lawsuit back in 2018. And it alleged that the head of the Department of Financial Services in New York systematically and aggressively and methodically coerce companies to terminate their business relationships with the NRA in order to punish and suppress its advocacy. I want you to think about that for a minute. You have, for example, President Trump, who has said, according to various news reports, that those who are in this nation from other nations protesting would be deported. You'll follow the logic on this. If you're in this nation, and you're not a citizen, I can guarantee you the president United States has that authority. But there is no authority for someone to impose their political views on others when it comes to the right to engage in business. This this comes down to something, a phrase that I coined two years ago called utilizing the regulatory authority of a government entity to interfere in trade. So the Department of Financial Services in New York, the superintendent did not like guns, so she sought to ensure that the Parkland shooting that killed 17 people in Florida, no kidding. This is what her justification was that it was because of the guns, not the gunman, not a deranged person. And so she told giant jurors companies like Lloyd's of London, that they will no longer use their services unless they disassociate from all gun advocacy groups, including the NRA. So here's the thing. Then Governor Andrew Cuomo, disgraced governor, he wound up issuing letters to various financial institutions and said the reputational risk of dealing with the NRA are such that we can no longer allow that to take place. So it's not just a smokescreen, but it was an overt campaign to silence the group. And so banks at once would do business with the NRA, even for basic checking and savings, what you would call basic depository services to cut them off. So you know, when you have things like this occurring in New York, do you wonder why there are men and women who will defend former President Trump regardless of who said what, it is no surprise to me at all. Now, it's almost hard to believe but the American Civil Liberties Union represented the NRA is said while we disagree with the NRA on many issues, the First Amendment its principles at stake. Okay. So the Supreme Court ruled nine zero of the unconstitutionality of a state agency to restrict the views of a advocacy group. That's what this is. Now, there are other issues coming before the Supreme Court regarding laws in Texas and Florida regarding how social media platforms curate content in their states. And whether the Biden administration has the authority to pressure tech companies to suppress disfavored speech, which it proposed during the COVID 19 vaccine crisis. issue is not that simple. When you've tried to make a mountain out of a molehill. Either a person has the right to free speech or they don't. That's all there is to it. And when the government interferes in that free speech, that's the violation. A private entity can restrict speech. I can restrict an employee from getting online and talking about our company talking about me, any leader in an organization needs to make sure that their social media is being used properly, websites, etc. But when the government goes out, whoever the government is a single person or a group of people and says you can't talk about something that's a violation of free speech. First Amendment very specifically applies to the government, not to private industry, and in the case of former President Trump if he gets back in office and he wants to deport students from Palestine and Syria and everywhere else in the world who are not citizens are here on a visa and are protesting in a manner that's inconsistent. That's gonna be an interesting discussion. It's one thing to speak. It's their thing to become violent, and we should have zero tolerance for violence period. As a story,

05:21

every business must be concerned about upsetting not a whole government agency, but just one rogue person with a bone to pick. The legal authority to occupy a position does not give one the legal authority to interfere and trade at Truesdell wealth. We call it the way we see it and only work with nice people who are like minded. For more information text 212-433-2525

05:46

You are listening to Paul Truesdale. The Chief Executive Officer of Truesdell wealth Incorporated, a registered investment advisor. Due to our extensive holdings and that of our clients, you should assume that we have a position in all companies discussed and that a conflict of interest exists. The information presented was provided for informational purposes only

Transcribed by https://otter.ai