National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo

(1) Whether, when respondent – a former New York official – implemented her scheme against the National Rifle Association of America, it was clearly established that the First Amendment did not allow a government official to coerce a disfavored speaker’s service providers to punish or suppress disfavored speech on her behalf; and (2) whether, when it is obvious that a government official’s conduct violates the Constitution, the violation is clearly established for purposes of qualified immunity despite some factual distinctions that are irrelevant under the governing constitutional rule.