NRA and Wayne LaPierre's Disassociation: Opening Statements at Civil Trial

Wayne Lapierre shows up on Monday in New York City for his civil trial at the New York Supreme Court.Photo byMichael M. Santiago / Getty Images

The National Rifle Association (NRA) faces a civil trial following a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James in 2020, alleging violations of nonprofit laws and the misuse of millions of dollars. The opening arguments in the trial presented a stark contrast in perspectives between the defendants' defence and the prosecution's claims.

The defence attorneys for the NRA and its former leaders, Wayne LaPierre, Wilson “Woody” Phillips, John Frazer, and Joshua Powell, sought to distinguish their clients from the allegations levied against them. The defence emphasized that while there were past violations and instances of misconduct within the NRA, they also highlighted that the organization itself was a victim of betrayal.

In contrast, the plaintiffs’ counsel outlined a narrative accusing LaPierre of redirecting substantial amounts of NRA funds for personal use, including extravagant expenditures on private jets, expensive dining, and family trips. The lawsuit alleges that these actions contributed to significant financial losses for the organization over several years.

Throughout the opening arguments, LaPierre's attorney, P. Kent Correll, urged the jury to set aside any preconceived notions about his client. Other defence attorneys for Phillips, Frazer, and Powell asserted that their clients had acted in good faith and had not intentionally harmed the NRA.

The trial is expected to span six weeks, during which around 120 witnesses will provide testimony. While some individual defendants reached settlements, the case continues against others. The jury's decision may involve recommendations on monetary repayment by the defendants to the NRA, the potential removal of Frazer from his position, and other remedies, including the oversight of the NRA's financial practices by an independent monitor.

The trial represents a culmination of legal battles and attempts to dismiss the lawsuit by the defendants, including the NRA's Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing. The case, initiated by the attorney general's office to dissolve the NRA, has evolved into a prolonged legal dispute centering on allegations of financial misconduct and violations of nonprofit laws.

As the trial unfolds, it sheds light on the internal workings and financial management of the NRA, an influential organization that has faced a decline in membership and political clout in recent years. The verdict and subsequent decisions by New York Supreme Court Judge Joel Cohen could have far-reaching implications for the future governance and operations of the NRA.