Restoring Federal Firearms Rights: A New DOJ Proposal Explained

The loss and restoration of firearms rights after a disqualifying criminal conviction has become a frequent subject of litigation post-Bruen. A new proposal by the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) aims to provide a pathway to restore firearms rights under federal law to those who would otherwise be prohibited through a detailed application process. It is important to note that this proposal is still in the comment period and no official application process exists at this time.

Understanding the Proposal

The new proposed DOJ rule seeks to create a structured and transparent process for individuals to restore their firearms rights. Applicants will need to prove 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”.

The proposed regulations presumptively exclude from relief most violent felons, sex offenders, drug traffickers and many others who are deemed likely to re-offend. Some applicants, such as those convicted of drug crimes or misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, will need to wait at least 10 years before they are eligible to apply. Others, including most non-violent felons, will need to wait a minimum of 5 years.

The proposed application process will require official documentation related to the underlying prohibiting conviction, supporting affidavits, letters, waivers and background checks.

State Law and Massachusetts

Massachusetts has some of the strictest firearms regulations in the United States. The new proposed DOJ rule clearly states that a restoration of federal firearms rights will not restore firearms rights under state law. This means that many prohibited people who reside in Massachusetts will not be able to access firearms even if their DOJ application is approved. A key exception – one alluded to in the proposed regulations – are those applicants who have restored their firearms under state law through the Massachusetts Firearms Licensing Review Board.

What’s Next?

The proposed rule is open for public comment until October 20, 2025. Comments will then be reviewed by the DOJ and the proposed rule may be modified. The DOJ will then decide whether to issue the new rule. The proposal anticipates the need for 50 employees and a total cost of $20 million to implement the new relief from disabilities procedure. The proposal relies upon an application fee to cover the associated costs. The anticipated cost estimate may be unrealistic and the need for Congressional funding may significantly hamper the implementation of any new regulations.

Our office is monitoring the new DOJ restoration of rights proposal closely. We specialize in the restoration of firearms rights and we expect to begin assisting our clients once the new regulations become effective.

Medical Marijuana Cards, LTC’s and Firearms Possession

Federal Law

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) released a newsletter in 2016 reinforcing its position on the use of medical marijuana. In short, BATFE has determined that any person who uses marijuana for medicinal purposes is an unlawful user of controlled substances and prohibited under Federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition.  BATFE has instructed FFL dealers to 1) inform customers to answer “yes” to question 11(e) on Form 4473 if they disclose that they hold a medicinal marijuana card and 2) withhold the transfer of firearms and ammunition to any person who they have reasonable cause to believe possesses a medical marijuana card.  BATFE’s position on medicinal marijuana was upheld by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Nevada in August of 2016.

In 2019, BATFE released guidance on when a former medical marijuana card holder will be eligible to possess firearms:

“The following scenarios will be used to determine the disqualification period in regard to possession of a medical marijuana user card:
1.
One year from the date of the medical marijuana user card’s expiration date; or
2.
One year from the date of “admission” of possession of the medical marijuana user card, if no expiration date is available; or
3.
One year from the date the medical marijuana user card is relinquished.”

LTC/FID in Massachusetts

The effect of medicinal marijuana cards on Massachusetts firearms licensing remains cloudy.  On one hand, G.L. c. 140, sec 131(e) requires a licensing authority to determine whether the possession of a firearm by an LTC applicant would be a violation of state or federal law.  On the other hand, the medicinal marijuana law states clearly that people who qualify for medicinal marijuana cards shall not be denied any right or privilege under state law.  There have been no published cases to date addressing this issue and there are no known cases of LTC/FID denials due to medical marijuana use.  However, if you are denied an LTC or FID due to your possession of a medicinal marijuana card, please contact my office at (617) 383-4652.

Resources:

The original 2011 ATF opinion can be read here:

https://www.atf.gov/file/60211/download

The June 2016 newsletter can be read here:

https://www.atf.gov/explosives/docs/newsletter/explosives-industry-newsletter-june-2016/download

Wilson v. Lynch, 2016 WL 4537376, ____ F.3d____ (2016) can be read here:

Click to access 14-15700.pdf

A recent news article on this matter can be read here:

http://www.wbur.org/news/2018/07/16/massachusetts-marijuana-guns

UPDATE: The 9th Circuit has upheld BATFE’s opinion that any person who uses marijuana for medicinal purposes is an unlawful user of controlled substances and prohibited under federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition.  Applying intermediate scrutiny, the Court held that this ban does not violate the 2nd Amendment.

The case can be read here:

Click to access 14-15700.pdf