Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s lawyers will be in federal court in Albany next month, when they’ll try to get a judge to dismiss the lawsuit against him by America’s largest civil rights organization.

The group is the National Rifle Association, which is asking a federal court to halt the governor’s efforts to use financial regulations to drive the gun rights group out of business here. Think of it as the first court test of what could be called the “Cuomo doctrine”: the governor’s vow that “extreme conservatives” have “no place in the state of New York.”

Cuomo first declared his doctrine in a radio interview in January 2014. He railed against “extreme conservatives who are ‘right to life,’ ‘pro-assault weapon,’ ‘anti-gay.’ ” Cuomo didn’t say whether he meant to include in his list of deplorables all Catholics, say, or Muslims, or Orthodox Jews.

What had really set Cuomo off was Republican opposition to his gun-control measures. He was infuriated that, after Sandy Hook, some objected to tightening already-strict New York gun laws.

Fair enough, one might say. The governor of New York is entitled to have a view on guns, to differ with the NRA and to join robustly in the debate over what to do about gun violence.

In April of this year, though, state regulators told insurers and banks they oversee to look at their relationships with gun rights groups. They warned of “reputational risks” in their “dealings” with the NRA.

“Nice little business you have here,” the state seemed to be saying to banks and insurers. “It’d be a shame if something happened to it.” The state has left little doubt that it was loaded for bear.

In May, regulators extracted fines of $1.3 million from Chubb and $7 million from Lockton Affinity, both involved with the NRA’s “Carry Guard” insurance for lawful gun owners. A Carry Guard website says the insurance offers “protection against civil liability, the cost to defend against civil and criminal legal actions and immediate access to attorney referrals.”

It also covers bail, some legal fees, “lawful firearm replacement” and compensation while in court, among other costs “resulting from the use of a legally possessed firearm — including an act of self-defense.”

Cuomo claims Carry Guard covers “intentional wrongdoing.” In May, he was sued by the NRA for “viewpoint discrimination” against it and the law-abiding gun owners it represents.

The NRA accuses Cuomo of running a campaign of “selective prosecution, backroom exhortations and public threats.” It claims the government seeks to halt its defense of the Second Amendment.

“Simply put,” the NRA alleges, Cuomo and New York regulators “made it clear to banks and insurers that it is bad business in New York to do business with the NRA.”

Whatever one thinks of gun control, the NRA is a venerable New York institution. It was founded here — at the 7th Regiment Armory on Park Avenue — in 1871 and has been operating here ever since.

What’s particularly shocking is that state regulators have failed to confine themselves to financial matters. New York’s financial regulators are lecturing financial institutions on politics.

“Passionate, courageous and articulate young people,” the state Department of Financial Services wrote to insurers after Parkland, “can no longer be ignored.”

What’s next — David Hogg for state superintendent of financial services?

No wonder the NRA is arguing that it’s being subjected to viewpoint discrimination. And no wonder Cuomo & Co. want the NRA’s lawsuit to be dismissed without being heard.

Cuomo last week filed a motion to have the case dismissed on the ground that it fails to state a claim. It certainly poses a risk to his hope to seize the high ground as he preps a run for president.

Which gets back to the Cuomo doctrine. If Cuomo can cripple a 147-year-old civil rights organization in New York, what would he be prepared to do as president?

Could he someday deploy financial regulators against “extreme conservatives” who hold religious views on same-sex marriage and abortion — and shelter under the same Bill of Rights as the NRA?