Columbus, OH – On Wednesday, The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in National Rifle Association v. Vullo, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and tell government officials they cannot hide behind qualified immunity to protect them from the consequences of violating the First Amendment.

“Superintendent Vullo’s premeditated bad-faith attack on the First Amendment does not deserve the same protections as police officers making split-second, life-and-death decisions,” said David C. Tryon, director of litigation at The Buckeye Institute. “This case presents an ideal vehicle for the court to reexamine the current, one-size-fits-all qualified immunity standard.”

In its brief, The Buckeye Institute argues that the current qualified immunity doctrine, which chills the exercise of First Amendment rights, is a particularly bad fit in First Amendment cases like NRA v. Vullo, where the official action does not involve police officers called upon to make split-second decisions, but bureaucrats making considered decisions regarding state policy. Buckeye further notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has protected free speech against government rules, regulations, and laws that encroach upon free speech and has decried government actions that might chill speech, whether intentional or incidental. 

Tryon continued, “While police officers, acting in good faith, may merit some degree of deference, policymakers making deliberate decisions do not. Our indispensable right of free speech should not be so flimsy as to allow government abuse with no consequence.”

# # #