Listen to this story.Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
“WAYNE’S WORLD” is how Monica Connell, a lawyer with the New York state attorney-general’s office, described how the National Rifle Association, better known as the NRA, operated for decades. On January 8th, during the opening statement of the state’s civil trial against the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, who has headed the gun-rights organisation since 1991, and two other former and current top executives, Ms Connell said, “this case is about corruption”.
The lawsuit filed by Letitia James, New York’s attorney-general, accuses the NRA’s leadership of instituting a culture of mismanagement and negligence which benefited themselves, family, friends and certain vendors, and caused the organisation to lose more than $63m, much of it donated by gun-owners. The state alleges that Mr LaPierre and the others used NRA money on luxury travel, including private jets, and did not declare expensive gifts, including African safaris and yacht trips. And, Ms Connell said, Mr LaPierre retaliated against anyone who questioned him. Oliver North, a former NRA president pushed out in 2019, is expected to testify.
Ms James first filed suit against the NRA in August 2020, seeking to dissolve it. The organisation is chartered by New York state, where it was founded in 1871, in the wake of the civil war. As it is registered as a charity in New York, it is under Ms James’s jurisdiction and watchful eye. A judge blocked her effort to disband the NRA, but said she should pursue other avenues as, if proven, her allegations tell “a grim story of greed, self-dealing, and lax financial oversight at the highest levels”. The NRA unsuccessfully filed for bankruptcy in Texas. A judge there ruled that the organisation was solvent and had filed only to evade mismanagement allegations in New York.
The NRA, Mr LaPierre and the other plaintiffs deny any wrongdoing. Mr LaPierre’s lawyer said his client took private jets because of death threats. As for the yacht excursions, well who wouldn’t want to go on a yacht? The NRA, for its part, appeared to be distancing itself from Mr LaPierre. In her opening statement the group’s lawyer praised him as a visionary, but also stressed that “The NRA is not Wayne LaPierre.”
The association was founded to improve marksmanship and training, and later also promoted safety. But, in large part because of Mr LaPierre, it has morphed into a powerful lobby for gun rights. It spent millions to help Donald Trump get elected in 2016. But it has struggled with falling revenue, falling membership and in-fighting.
Mr LaPierre announced his resignation on January 5th, citing health reasons. How much this will change is unclear. The executives who remain are LaPierre loyalists. The interim head is his spokesperson and one of his closest advisers. But if the NRA loses the suit there is a good chance that the people who put the organisation into this position will be removed by a state overseer. Stephen Gutowski, the founder of the Reload, an independent publication focused on firearms policy and politics, points to the obvious irony: the lawsuit, which started out seeking to dismantle the NRA, may be “the best chance the NRA has for surviving”. ■
Stay on top of American politics with Checks and Balance, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter, which examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
NORMALLY, GAVIN NEWSOM is loose. The Democratic governor of California talks with a staccato cadence, often flitting from one incomplete thought to the next. When he talks to journalists or asks a guest on his podcast a meandering question, he tends to use a lot of meaningless filler words: “in the context of” is a frequent Newsomism. But on June 10th he was clear and direct. “This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation,” he said during a televised address after President Donald Trump deployed nearly 5,000 troops to Los Angeles to quell protests over immigration raids. “We do not want our streets militarised by our own armed forces. Not in LA. Not in California. Not anywhere.”
A woman shops at a supermarket on April 30, 2025 in Arlington, Virginia.
Sha Hanting | China News Service | Getty Images
Consumers in the early part of June took a considerably less pessimistic about the economy and potential surges in inflation as progress appeared possible in the global trade war, according to a University of Michigan survey Friday.
The university’s closely watched Surveys of Consumers showed across-the-board rebounds from previously dour readings, while respondents also sharply cut back their outlook for near-term inflation.
For the headline index of consumer sentiment, the gauge was at 60.5, well ahead of the Dow Jones estimate for 54 and a 15.9% increase from a month ago. The current conditions index jumped 8.1%, while the future expectations measure soared 21.9%.
The moves coincided with a softening in the heated rhetoric that has surrounded President Donald Trump’s tariffs. After releasing his April 2 “liberation day” announcement, Trump has eased off the threats and instituted a 90-day negotiation period that appears to be showing progress, particularly with top trade rival China.
“Consumers appear to have settled somewhat from the shock of the extremely high tariffs announced in April and the policy volatility seen in the weeks that followed,” survey director Joanne Hsu said in a statement. “However, consumers still perceive wide-ranging downside risks to the economy.”
To be sure, all of the sentiment indexes were still considerably below their year-ago readings as consumers worry about what impact the tariffs will have on prices, along with a host of other geopolitical concerns.
On inflation, the one-year outlook tumbled from levels not seen since 1981.
The one-year estimate slid to 5.1%, a 1.5 percentage point drop, while the five-year view edged lower to 4.1%, a 0.1 percentage point decrease.
“Consumers’ fears about the potential impact of tariffs on future inflation have softened somewhat in June,” Hsu said. “Still, inflation expectations remain above readings seen throughout the second half of 2024, reflecting widespread beliefs that trade policy may still contribute to an increase in inflation in the year ahead.”
The Michigan survey, which will be updated at the end of the month, had been an outlier on inflation fears, with other sentiment and market indicators showing the outlook was fairly contained despite the tariff tensions. Earlier this week, the Federal Reserve of New York reported that the one-year view had fallen to 3.2% in May, a 0.4 percentage point drop from the prior month.
At the same time, the Bureau of Labor Statistics this week reported that both producer and consumer prices increase just 0.1% on a monthly basis, pointing toward little upward pressure from the duties. Economists still largely expect the tariffs to show impact in the coming months.
The soft inflation numbers have led Trump and other White House officials to demand the Fed start lowering interest rates again. The central bank is slated to meet next week, with market expectations strongly pointing to no cuts until September.
Economics1 week ago
Economics1 week ago
Economics1 week ago
Finance1 week ago
Blog Post1 week ago
Personal Finance1 week ago
Accounting7 days ago