The National Rifle Association has taken the extraordinary step of suing the NRA Foundation, accusing the organization it created to support gun safety and education programs of acting in bad faith, misleading donors, and freezing millions of dollars meant to fund core NRA initiatives.
Filed in Virginia, National Rifle Association of America v. The NRA Foundation alleges that the Foundation’s current leadership (largely made up of former NRA directors aligned with prior leadership) has deliberately severed its historic financial support for the NRA while continuing to trade on the NRA name, trademarks, and reputation.
At the center of the dispute is money and control.
According to the complaint, the NRA Foundation was established in 1990 for a single purpose: to raise tax-deductible donations using the NRA’s name and goodwill, then funnel those funds back into NRA charitable and educational programs. Those programs include the NRA National Firearms Museum, Eddie Eagle GunSafe, youth training initiatives, and public-facing safety education relied upon by schools, law enforcement, and community groups nationwide.
For more than three decades, that arrangement functioned as intended. Until now.
Millions Raised for NRA Programs Now Withheld
The lawsuit alleges that despite holding more than $160 million in assets, the Foundation has refused to approve any grant funding for the NRA for 2026, breaking with decades of precedent and effectively cutting off the organization’s educational and charitable operations.
The NRA claims this decision was not based on financial necessity, donor intent, or program performance. But was instead a calculated move by Foundation leadership to pressure and punish the reformed NRA after members voted out prior leadership and installed a new board committed to transparency and reform.
In plain terms: the NRA says the Foundation is sitting on donor money raised for NRA programs and refusing to release it.
Donor Confusion Is Central to the Case
One of the most serious allegations in the complaint is that the Foundation continues to solicit donations using the NRA name and branding in a way that leads donors to believe they are supporting the NRA itself. When, according to the lawsuit, the Foundation has no intention of passing those funds along.
The NRA argues this violates both donor intent and trademark law.
Donors attending Friends of NRA events, the complaint states, reasonably believe their contributions will support NRA-run gun safety, training, and education programs. The lawsuit alleges that Foundation leadership knows this. And is exploiting that belief while simultaneously starving those same programs of funding.
Intellectual Property and Control at Stake
The lawsuit also seeks a court ruling affirming that the NRA (not the Foundation) owns the NRA trademarks, branding, and intellectual property the Foundation relies on to raise money.
According to the complaint, those assets exist solely to benefit the NRA and its mission. The NRA alleges the Foundation is improperly using those marks while attempting to operate independently and redirect control away from the organization that created it.
The NRA is asking the court to:
- Block the Foundation from using NRA trademarks without authorization
- Prevent the misappropriation of donor funds raised for NRA programs
- Stop the Foundation from unilaterally breaking its long-standing affiliate relationship
A Break Fueled by Old Guard Politics
The filing makes clear this is not just a legal dispute. But a power struggle rooted in the NRA’s internal reform movement.
According to the complaint, many Foundation trustees were allied with prior NRA leadership (Wayne LaPierre) and opposed recent member-driven changes. When those efforts failed at the ballot box, the lawsuit alleges, Foundation leadership shifted tactics. Using financial leverage to retain influence over the NRA’s future.
SEE ALSO: A Gun Guide for Beginners
NRA CEO Doug Hamlin called the lawsuit a “last resort,” saying the Foundation’s actions place vital public-facing programs at risk and directly conflict with donor expectations.
What Happens Next
This case now puts a spotlight on one of the most sensitive issues in the firearms advocacy world: who controls donor money raised in the NRA’s name, and whether a charitable foundation can withhold support from the organization it was created to serve.
If the NRA prevails, the ruling could reshape how affiliated nonprofits operate and how donor intent is enforced across the gun-rights landscape.
If not, the NRA faces the prospect of rebuilding its education and safety programs without access to funds raised explicitly for that purpose.
Either way, this lawsuit signals that the NRA’s internal reckoning is far from over. And that the battle lines are now firmly drawn in court.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Read the full article here
