New York — A state Supreme Court judge is set to deliberate on stricter oversight measures for the National Rifle Association after a jury found the organization and several former leaders guilty of corruption. The trial, which opened in New York on Monday, could result in the appointment of an independent monitor to supervise the NRA’s operations for three years and a possible permanent leadership ban for former executive Wayne LaPierre.
In February, jurors concluded that LaPierre, 74, misappropriated millions of dollars from the NRA, funding an opulent lifestyle. This included private jets and lavish trips, at the expense of the group’s financial integrity. The jury held LaPierre, along with other executives, responsible for breaching their fiduciary duties by neglecting financial oversight and failing to implement a whistleblower policy.
This legal action originated from a 2020 lawsuit by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who accused LaPierre and others of violating state laws and NRA internal regulations to enrich themselves. Besides LaPierre, other key figures implicated include John Frazer, the NRA’s current corporate secretary, Wilson “Woody” Phillips, former treasurer, and Joshua Powell, a former top executive.
Throughout the proceedings, James’ team depicted the NRA as a benefactor of extravagance, all funded by its members’ dues. Notably, the financial toll attributed to LaPierre by the jury was around $5.4 million, of which he has since repaid $1 million. Phillips was found to have caused $2 million in damages, though no monetary damages were attributed to Frazer.
Frazer, the only involved executive still employed by the NRA, faced accusations of authorizing false statements in NRA’s annual filings. Nevertheless, jurors did not find sufficient grounds for his removal. In contrast, the jury did believe that grounds existed for LaPierre’s displacement, a decision coming shortly after his resignation in January, attributed to health concerns.
Further legal challenges continued as LaPierre’s lawyers appealed against permanent restrictions on his leadership roles, arguing it infringed upon his freedom of association. These contentions were voiced just as the NRA sought to distance itself from past controversies, appointing new executives and adopting internal reforms intended to restore credibility and ensure compliance with non-profit regulations.
Significantly, the NRA, which has been a fixture in New York since 1871, argued that its operations have been grossly misunderstood and maligned. Meanwhile, gun safety advocates, such as Everytown for Gun Safety and Giffords, have urged rigorous accountability measures, suggesting that the ongoing trial underscores a pattern of longstanding mismanagement within NRA’s leadership.
As the judge considers imposing a monitor and other sanctions, all parties await decisions that could reshape the governance of one of the most powerful advocacy groups in the United States. Consequently, this case not only highlights the internal challenges faced by the NRA but also reflects ongoing national debates over gun control and nonprofit oversight.