In November 2024, President-elect Donald Trump chose U.S. Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY) to serve as ambassador to the United Nations (UN). The decision raises concerns about Stefanik’s ties to the gun industry, including through her husband, Matt Manda, who is the public affairs manager for the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).
If Stefanik is confirmed by the Senate, the NSSF would have direct access to a Cabinet-level official charged with representing American interests before the UN.
stefanik’s support for the gun industry
Since entering Congress in 2016, Stefanik has repeatedly sided with the gun lobby by blocking critical efforts to address gun violence, including voting against the Enhanced Background Checks Act, the Violence Against Women Act, and the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. She has also voted in favor of bills that would expand access to guns. Notably, she backed the NSSF-supported Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, claiming that “[o]ur 2nd Amendment rights don’t disappear when we cross state lines,” and arguing the bill “protects law-abiding citizens’ Constitutional rights.”
In recent years, the NSSF has lobbied for state laws that prevent credit card companies from creating special merchant category codes (MCCs) for firearm dealers, and in February 2024, Stefanik introduced a bill that would do the same on the federal level. While MCCs would make it easier for credit card companies to spot when someone purchases firearms and ammunition in bulk in preparation for a mass shooting, for example, critics like the NSSF have argued that MCCs are an invasion of privacy and could be used to create a registry of gun owners.
Such claims are highly ironic given that the NSSF amassed a database of gun buyers’ sensitive personal information from its members — some of the country’s largest gun makers and sellers — for political purposes.
In August 2024, Stefanik also introduced the Modern Firearm Safety Act, a bill that, despite its name, would block states from requiring critical safety features on handguns, including loaded-chamber indicators, magazine disconnect mechanisms, and microstamping technology. Though it stalled in Congress, the bill directly challenged state laws, like those in California and New York, that require such features.
Loaded-chamber indicators visually alert gun owners if a round is chambered, while magazine disconnects prevent firearms from firing when the magazine is removed — features that could save lives. A recent NBC News investigation found that hundreds of people would be alive today if their handguns had magazine disconnects. Additionally, microstamping would significantly aid law enforcement in solving gun-related crimes. Yet the NSSF has consistently opposed such safety features for years.
In a press release, Stefanik’s office claimed the bill would help “restore Second Amendment rights in restrictive states.” Manda also defended the bill on X, where he called guns with such safety features “gimmick firearms that aren’t reliable” and falsely claimed that the “[m]icrostamping patent holder says it’s unproven,” which never happened.
Editor’s Note: To read our interview with Todd Lizotte, the inventor of microstamping, click here.
THE GUN INDUSTRY’S OPPOSITION TO THE UN
Gun groups like the National Rifle Association have historically been critical of the UN regarding what they view as “overreaching small arms initiatives” and international gun regulation efforts, such as the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). Adopted by the UN in 2013 and signed by the Obama administration, the ATT regulates international trade of conventional arms and reduce the illegal arms trade, and has been a major point of contention for the NSSF and NRA, who claimed that the treaty could have required new domestic gun laws, though it explicitly “does not impact a [country’s] domestic gun control laws or other firearm ownership policies.”
In 2019, the NSSF praised President Trump’s rejection of the ATT, saying that it “strongly opposed the treaty” and claiming that it “would have exposed the firearms and ammunition industry to a confusing web of international regulations that would not have contributed to curbing illegal arms trafficking, protecting human rights or guaranteeing the rights of United States citizens.”
It is well known that the UN, as a multilateral body, is focused on maintaining international peace and security and protecting human rights. Despite that, the NSSF viewed the UN’s approach to arms control as an overreach impacting the gun industry and even “American sovereignty” — views that directly contradict the UN’s broader mission to promote global security and stability.
Similarly, when the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a new rule to tighten firearms exports last year in the interest of promoting national security and foreign policy interests, and reducing gun violence abroad, the NSSF blasted the decision, claiming it was “intended to hobble the firearm industry’s ability to compete in the international market under the false pretense of advancing U.S. national security.”
The Department of Commerce began the rulemaking process after reports that the agency had helped American gun makers export tens of thousands of semi-automatic weapons to “some of the most violent countries in the world” by easing export restrictions and bringing international buyers to the NSSF’s Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show.
As the UN continues to advocate for stricter regulations on small arms, a U.S. ambassador with a record of opposing gun safety measures and supporting pro-industry proposals, with a direct ear to the NSSF, might put the U.S. at odds with international disarmament efforts, which could have consequences for domestic and global security.