42. On or about February 25, 2018, the Chairman of Lockton Companies, placed a distraught telephone call to the NRA. Lockton had been a close business partner of the NRA for nearly twenty years; its commitment to the parties business relationship had not wavered in connection with the Parkland tragedy, nor the prior Sandy Hook tragedy, nor any previous wave of public controversy relating to gun control. Nonetheless, although he expressed that Lockton privately wished to continue doing business with the NRA, the chairman confided that Lockton would need to drop the NRAentirelyfor fear of losing [our] license to do business in New York.
43. On February 26, 2018, Lockton publicly tweeted that it would discontinue providing brokerage services for all NRA-endorsed insurance programs.
65. Defendants concerted efforts to stifle the NRAs freedom of speech and to retaliate against the NRA based on its viewpoints are causing other insurance, banking, and financial institutions doing business with the NRA, such as Lloyds of London (Lloyds), to rethink their mutually beneficial business relationships with the NRA for fear of monetary sanctions or expensive public investigations.40 Indeed, Lloyds announced on May 9, 2018, that it would terminate all insurance offered, marketed, endorsed, or otherwise made available through the NRA in light of the DFS Investigation.
66. The NRA has encountered serious difficulties obtaining corporate insurance coverage to replace coverage withdrawn by the Corporate Carrier. The NRAs inability to obtain insurance in connection with media liability raises risks that are especially acute; if insurers remain afraid to transact with the NRA, there is a substantial risk that NRATV will be forced to cease operating. The NRA has spoken to numerous carriers in an effort to obtain replacement corporate insurance coverage; nearly every carrier has indicated that it fears transacting with the NRA specifically in light of DFSs actions against Lockton and Chubb.
67. Defendants threats have also imperiled the NRAs access to basic banking services, despite the absence of any alleged regulatory violations in connection with the NRAs banking activities. Multiple banks withdrew their bids in the NRAs RFP process following the issuance of the April 2018 Letters, based on concerns that any involvement with the NRAeven providing the organization with basic depository serviceswould expose them to regulatory reprisals.
68. Defendants campaign is achieving its intended chilling effect on banks throughout DFSs jurisdiction. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, one community banker from Upstate New York told American Banker magazine that in light of the apparent politically motivated nature of the DFS guidance, [i]ts hard to know what the rules are or whom to do business with, because bankers must attempt to anticipate who is going to come into disfavor with the New York State DFS or other regulators.42 Other industry sources told American Banker that, such regulatory guidelines are frustratingly vague, and can effectively compel institutions to cease catering to legal businesses.