NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund

Uncategorized

NRA Annual Meeting Report, Part 3

April 24, 2026 by 6 Comments

One of the biggest portions of the Board meeting held after the Annual Meeting is devoted to elections of officers, trustees, and members of the Audit, Executive, and Nominating Committees. Unlike my first meeting in April 2025 where there were many contested elections with multiple rounds of voting, this year it mostly went smoothly with only a few multiple rounds of voting.

First up was the election of the officers with the following elected by unanimously by acclamation.

  • President – Bill Bachenberg
  • First VP – Mark Vaughan
  • Second VP – Rocky Marshall
  • Exec VP – Doug Hamlin
  • Secretary – John Frazer (Was on the ballot because the intended replacement backed out. John will remain in the Secretary’s position with the intention that a replacement found within the next 6 months)
  • Treasurer – Mike Erstling

After Doug Hamlin was elected, he appointed John Commerford as the Executive Director of ILA and Josh Savani as the Executive Director of General Operations. These appointments were confirmed unanimously.

Surprisingly, there was a contested election for the Chief Compliance Officer. It was between the incumbent Matthew Boyden and Emory “Jack” Hagan who is on the Board of Directors. The winner had to receive 3/4th’s of the vote under New York Not for Profit Corporation Law. Prior to the vote, board counsel Alex Reid informed the Board that under the Final Judgment that two years of severance would have to be paid to Mr. Boyden as he would have been replaced without cause. Both men were given time to make campaign speeches and members could argue for or against a candidate. The vote was 56 for Boyden, 6 for Hagan, and 2 voting present. There were a total of 64 votes cast.

The next election was for the Audit Committee. Nominees are announced by the President and then each is voted on separately. Given it is a committee of the board under NY NPCL, candidates must receive a 3/4th’s vote of those present. This election was held before the Executive Committee because as I will explain in a future post the Executive Committee was restructured and the Audit Committee chair is automatically a member of the committee.

  • Regis Synan – 55 yea, 0 no, 55 present
  • Theresa Inacker – 55 yea, 0 no, 55 present
  • Charlie Beers – 55 yea, 3 no, 64 present
  • John Richardson – 59 yea, 0 no, 64 present
  • Jonathan Goldstein – 59 yea, 0 no, 64 present

After this vote, the Audit Committee briefly met. We re-elected Charlie Beers as chair and Regis Synan as vice-chair. We reported this back to the meeting.

Next up was the restructured Executive Committee in which four at-large members were elected. The at-large members were expected to bring strong financial, managerial, legal, or other relevant experience to the committee. Like the Audit Committee, they required a 3/4th’s affirmative vote. The Nominating Committee had nominated Alex Carroll and Anthony Colandro. I nominated Randy Luth who is the CEO of Luth-AR and was the founder of DPMS/Panther Arms prior to its sale to the former Freedom Group. The other nominees were Charlie Hiltunen, Judge Phil Journey, Janet Nyce, and Prof. David Raney. Candidates needed 48 votes to win.

No one was elected in the first round of voting. In the second round of voting, Anthony Colandro with 55 votes and Charlie Hiltunen with 48 votes were elected while David Raney withdrew. For the third round of voting, both Phil Journey and Janet Nyce withdrew giving Alex Carroll and Randy Luth 57 votes by acclamation.

Next up was the NRA Special Conservation Fund aka the Whittington Center board of trustees. Nominated for three-year terms ending in 2029 were Pete Brownell, Philip Gray, Jerry Kraus, Randy Luth, Andrew McEntire, Janet Nyce, and James-Scott Wong. Nominated for a one-year term ending in 2027 was Nick Krallis. The entire slate was elected by acclamation.

There were six nominees for the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund board of trustees. From academia were Prof. F. Lee Francis of Widener University Commonwealth Law School, Prof. Robert Cottrol of George Washington University Law School, Prof. Raymond Diamond of LSU Paul M. Hebert Law Center, and Prof. Nick Johnson of Fordham University School of Law. Also nominated for reappointment were James (Jim) Porter II and Graham Hill. All six were elected as trustees of the CRDF by acclamation.

The final election was for the Nominating Committee. The committee is composed of six board members and three non-board members. No board member may serve on the Nominating Committee more than once in a three-year period nor if their term expires in the ensuing year.

Nominees from the board were Jason Wilson, Howard Massingill, Jerry Kraus, Larry Finder, Amanda Suffecool, Linda Walker, Knox Williams, Scott Emslie, and Jim Porter. The non-board nominees were Ed Hope, Rick Figueroa, James-Scott Wong, and Jackie Emslie. There were 59 valid ballots which meant a winner had to have at least 30 votes to win.

The six board members of the 2026-2027 Nominating Committee are Amanda Suffecool (40), Howard Massingill (39), Jason Wilson (39), Linda Walker (34), Jerry Kraus (32), and Knox Williams (32). The three non-board members are James-Scott Wong (46), Rick Figueroa (41), and Jackie Emslie (31).

Congratulations to all who won. It is expected that the major committee assignments will be done by this end of this week and the rest soon after. The days of waiting until June or July are over.

Uncategorized

If You Want To Donate, Here Are Some Better Groups

August 25, 2014 by 1 Comment

Jonathan Lowy of the Brady Center recently sent out the e-mail seen below crowing about going three for three in court cases involving certain semi-automatic rifles whose cosmetics horrify the gun prohibitionists. He is referring to cases that challenged new state laws that created a magazine ban, an “assault weapons” (sic) ban, or both. The states involved were Connecticut, Maryland, and New York.

After the Sandy Hook tragedy where a gunman fatally shot 20 children and 6 adults, state lawmakers finally said ‘ENOUGH IS ENOUGH’ and took action.


New York, Connecticut, and Maryland made it more difficult to buy military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines, so these weapons of war would never again threaten lives in our homes, schools and communities.


Unfortunately, the corporate gun lobby saw a threat to their profits and went to court to challenge these laws.


At the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project, we didn’t let these attacks on our public safety go unchallenged. We filed amicus briefs and worked closely with state officials to help them defend these life-saving laws. Law firms with our national pro bono alliance, Lawyers for a Safer America, were critical to these efforts.


WE ARE 3-for-3 SO FAR. Federal trial judges in ALL 3 STATES have upheld the new laws. Your support helped us win these victories.


But our work continues — the gun lobby is appealing the rulings, which means we’re still working hard with states and filing amicus briefs to meet the challenge. On August 5, we filed a brief in the New York case. Next week we’re filing in Connecticut.


These federal appeals cases are critically important – the rulings will set far-reaching precedents on the power of states to protect their communities from gun violence.


We need your support to preserve the victories we’ve won so far and make sure the corporate gun lobby isn’t allowed to put profits over people’s lives.


Please support the Brady Center today to help us keep our winning streak going, and protect lives in our nation’s homes, schools and communities.


With gratitude,


Jonathan Lowy
Director, Brady Center Legal Action Project

I’m surprised that Mr. Lowy didn’t include the nonsensical ruling out of Colorado which upheld the Hickenlooper mag ban.

The recent decision out of Maryland does show that certain judges who are ignorant about firearms and who have a bias against them will listen to what the Brady Center puts into their amicus briefs. Even though those of us in the gun culture consider their arguments to be “authentic frontier gibberish” we still need to counter them. Thus I donate to groups like the Second Amendment Foundation, the Mountain States Legal Foundation, and the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund who will present the counter arguments to the Jonathan Lowy’s of the world.

I would encourage you to do the same if you can.

Uncategorized

Why Does The Brady Campaign Want To Keep Gays Defenseless?

March 19, 2012 by 2 Comments

The oral arguments before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Peterson v. Garcia et al are being held this afternoon in Denver. The case involves the attempt by Gray Peterson to obtain a concealed carry permit in Colorado as that state does not recognize his Washington State permit. For those that are unaware of Mr. Peterson and this case, he is gay and is a strong advocate of Second Amendment rights.

While the primary oral arguments will be made by John Monroe, attorney for Mr. Peterson, and the Colorado Attorney General’s Office, the Court of Appeals has allowed extra time for oral arguments by certain amici (friends of the court) in this case. Alan Gura will be representing the Second Amendment Foundation and a whole host of groups which include among others Illinois Carry, ISRA, and CalGuns. The NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund will be represented by Matt Bower of the NRA and the Brady Campaign will be represented by Jonathan Lowy.

As might be expected from the gun prohibitionists, they are portraying this as a battle between the good Brady Campaign and the evil NRA to prevent “guns in the streets.” From their press release:

Attorneys for the Brady Center and the NRA (National Rifle Association) will face off in a first-in-the-nation case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in Denver, Colorado Monday, March 19. The case, Peterson v. Garcia, will decide whether the Constitution allows Colorado to protect public safety by continuing its policy of regulating who can carry loaded and concealable guns in public.

Senior Judge Walker D. Miller of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado dismissed the original case on March 8, 2011.The gun lobby then appealed to the 10th Circuit.

The Brady Center filed an amicus brief on July 19, 2011, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, urging dismissal of the appeal. The Brady Center’s brief highlights the severe danger posed by concealed weapons, with studies showing that the carrying of guns in public does not make one safer, but instead increases the risks of death and injury. Brady believes that communities should be able to decide who can carry loaded guns on their streets, and in their parks and playgrounds.

Dangerous legislation has been introduced in Congress to force states like Colorado to honor concealed weapon licenses granted by other states, even by states with virtually no standards for concealed carry, and that allow carrying by people with violent pasts.

Notice that there is no mention in this release – and I presume none in their brief – that this case is really about a gay man wishing to protect himself from predators. I’d like to think that at least some of the the Brady Campaign’s donors might be appalled – and rightfully so – if they knew this.