About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


1 [1] (July 24, 2026)

handle is hein.crs/goveuxd0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Congressional Research Service Informing the legislative debate since 1914 July 24, 2026 The Department of Justice Proposed Rule to Restore Firearms Rights to Prohibited Persons The Gun Control Act (GCA) categorically prohibis certain classes of individuals, including individuals convicted of felony offenses, from possessing, receiving, shipping, or transporting a firearm connected with interst or foreign comminerce. The GCA also authorizes these covered individuals to apply to the Attorney General to have their firearms rights restored. In 2025, the Department of Justice issued a proposed nule establishing guidelines for this process to apply for relief from disabilities. This In Focus summarizes the proposed rule. Before doing so, it provides an overview of relevant law, including a federal statute that effectively barred the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) from enforcing the relief statute, and relevant legal developments, including the delegation of enforcement responsibility of the relief statute to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The In Focus closes with considerations for Congress. Gun Contro Act: Relevant Overview The GCA, at 18 U.S.C ( 922(g), makes it unlawful for nine classes of individuals to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. The satu covers anyone (1) who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) who is a fugitive from justice; (3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance . . . ; (4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution; (5) who, being an alien-(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) [generally] has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa . . ; (6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; (8) who is subject to a [qualifying domestic violence restraining order]; (9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Agency Adminstration of §925(c) As first enacted, the 1968 GCA at 18 US > 9 allowed a single class of prohibited persons-an individual convicted of a non-firearm-related felony-to apply for relief from the statutory prohibition to the Secretary of the Treasury. The GCA authorized the Secretary to grant such relief' if, upon consideration of the circumstances regarding the conviction, and the applicant's record and reputation, the Secretary was satisf[ied] that the applicant will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest. In 1986, Congress amended § 925(c) to allow any prohibited person to seek relief under § 922(g). Congress also authoried applicants denied relief by the Secretary to submit petitions in federal court. The administration of the original § 925(c) relief program was delegated to the Director of ATF, then a bureau within the Department of the Treasury (Treasury). In 2002, Congress transferred ATF from Treasury to DOJ and delegated relief applications to the Attorney General. In its 2025 proposed rule, DOJ asserted that ATF's relief process was beset by ad hoc determinations that compromised public safety, adding that the process was time consuming and resource intensive. According to DOJ, it was for these easons that, in 1992 and in subequ ent. appropriations measures, Congress preclIded ATF from using any funds to investigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C. 925(c). In United States v. Bean, acknowledging that ATF was barred from denying an application by the appropriations restriction, the Supreme Court held that courts have no jurisdiction under the statute to restore firearms rights absent an actual denial by the delegated executive authority. The current version of § 925( directs relief applications to the Attorney General. Background Supreme Court Cases As noted, the GCA prohibits nine categories of individuals from possessing firearms. In United States v. Rahimi, the Supreme Court ejected a facial challenge to one such prohibition, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) (applicable to individuals subject to certain domestic violence restraining orders), explainn that sufficient historical support existed for the principle that [w]hen an individual poses a clear threat of physical violence to another, the threatening individual may be disarmed temporarily. On June 18, 2026, in United States v. Hemani, the Supreme Court held that another prohibition, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) (applicable to any person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance), o o automatically disarm[] anyone who regularly uses any amount of any controlled substance for anything other than its 'prescribed purpose,' regardless of individualized circumstances. Proposed Rule On July 22, 2025, the DOJ published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) at 90 FR 34394, entitled Application for Relief from Disabilities Imposed by Federal Laws with eongress Qov 0