Federal Government Reopens Gun-Rights Restoration Process — But It Won’t Apply to Most State Convictions

For the first time in more than 30 years, the federal government is reopening a process that allows certain people who are federally prohibited from possessing firearms to apply for restoration of their gun rights.

But there is an important limitation that is getting lost in many of the headlines:

For most people convicted of state crimes, this new federal process is not the answer.

The U.S. Department of Justice has issued a final rule establishing a process for applications under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c), a federal law allowing certain prohibited persons to ask the Attorney General for relief from a federal firearms disability.

Although this remedy has existed for decades, Congress began prohibiting the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from spending money to investigate these applications in 1992. As a practical matter, the process became unavailable – it technically existed, but there was no money to run it.

DOJ is now reviving the federal process.

However, the distinction of whether a person was convicted in state or federal court is particularly important for Idaho gun owners.

Most people who contact our office about restoring their firearms rights were convicted of state felony crimes, not federal crimes. Those individuals will generally need to address their convictions through the appropriate state-law restoration process, rather than simply filing an application with the federal government.

For example, someone convicted of an Idaho burglary offense should not assume that the new federal application process provides a shortcut around Idaho law. That person may instead need to pursue relief through Idaho courts or the Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole, depending upon the circumstances.

In other words, before asking, “How do I apply under the new federal program?” the better question is:

“What conviction or other event is actually causing me to be prohibited from possessing a firearm?”

That determination matters because federal and state firearms laws do not operate identically.

In addition, for people who are appropriate candidates for § 925(c), the new rule does not automatically restore anyone’s rights.

Applicants will have to demonstrate that they are not likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that granting relief would not be contrary to the public interest.

DOJ may consider the applicant’s criminal history, the circumstances surrounding the prohibition, subsequent conduct, court records and other relevant information. Certain convictions also carry presumptive waiting periods or disqualifications.

Applicants should also expect to provide substantial documentation. This is not simply a matter of finding “the form” and submitting it.  Old charging documents, judgments, sentencing records and other certified court records may be critical to determining eligibility and obtaining relief.

The new federal rule is significant because it revives a firearms-rights restoration mechanism that has effectively been dormant since 1992.

But headlines suggesting that the federal government has simply created a new way for everyone with an old felony to get their gun rights back are misleading.

If your prohibition stems from a federal conviction or a state misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, the new § 925(c) process may provide an important new avenue for relief. If your felony conviction was entered in an Idaho state court, however, you will generally need to look first to Idaho’s restoration remedies.

Before beginning either process, the critical first step is identifying exactly what is causing the firearms prohibition and whether it arises under state law, federal law, or both.

For some Americans with old federal convictions or with state misdemeanor convictions for domestic violence, the new DOJ rule may finally reopen a door that has been closed for more than three decades. For most Idahoans with state convictions, however, the path to restoring firearms rights remains much closer to home.