It feels like decades – and it almost certainly is – since any federal departments or agencies of the government displayed anything but hostility toward gun rights. The second Trump administration has changed that (to a limited extent), at least where it counts, which is within the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, commonly referred to as the ATF. Though prevailing attitudes seem to have shifted, the DOJ has managed to come up with an idea that seems very promising on its face – until one delves into who would benefit from it and how.
On Aug. 17, Attorney General Todd Blanche unveiled a process that will allow certain Americans who previously have had their Second Amendment rights taken away to once again become legal gun owners.
Who Gets Their Gun Rights Restored?
Dubbed “Federal Firearm Rights Restoration” by the DOJ, the program will be rolled out in stages this year. “Anyone who is federally prohibited from handling firearms under 18 U.S.C. 922(g) can apply for FFRR relief,” the DOJ website explains. But relief will not be available to all prohibited persons. There is an extensive list of crimes that disqualify anyone previously convicted of them.
That list includes, but is not limited to, homicide, rape or sexual assault, human trafficking, robbery, arson, carjacking, assault, and terrorism. In fact, the list of “presumptive disqualifiers” is so extensive that one wonders who would in fact qualify to have their gun rights restored.
Free with the Daily Briefing
85EssaysUnravel the Constitution
Hamilton, Madison & Jay’s complete case for America, free and searchable in the Publius Reader.
Free with the Daily Briefing. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Justice Department lists the reasons for losing one’s gun rights that could be reversed by this new program. Some of them appear to conflict with the list of “presumptive disqualifiers.” For example, “Domestic violence misdemeanants,” “Certain aliens,” and “Unlawful drug users” are among those who can apply to have their Second Amendment Rights restored. Yet, being “an unlawful user or addict of controlled substances,” “an alien in the United States illegally or under a nonimmigrant visa,” or having been convicted of “intimate partner or domestic violence” are all disqualifiers. The “controlled substances” do not, for this purpose, include marijuana.
"The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and the federal government should not permanently deprive Americans of a constitutional right without regard to whether they pose a danger to public safety," the newly minted attorney general said in a statement. "This rule establishes a rigorous, commonsense process that protects the public while giving deserving Americans a real path to restoration."
Still, it appears that most people previously stripped of their gun rights are unlikely to have them restored under this program.
Progress, of Sorts – But Will it Work?
No doubt, the nation’s leading gun rights groups and activists will be following the program with interest, once it is put to the test. As it stands, there’s an argument to be made that the DOJ still does, in fact, consider the Second Amendment to be a second-class right. You can be convicted of any number of crimes, serve your time – repaying your debt to society, as it were – and still be permanently barred from exercising a constitutional right.
As things stand, it seems the principal beneficiaries will be marijuana users and those who were deprived of their Second Amendment rights for political reasons, such as Jan. 6 protesters and various other individuals who fell afoul of the Barack Obama and/or Joe Biden administrations.
"While the final rule falls short on a few of these suggestions, it is an important step in the right direction,” the National Rifle Association said in a statement. “As ever, we will continue our advocacy to ensure no American is unduly deprived of the right to keep and bear arms."
There will be a process, though. Those who apply for restoration are required to produce character references and satisfy the DOJ that they pose no threat to the general public. It all seems rather arbitrary. It’s no secret that the Justice Department is still harboring any number of bureaucrats who lean left and are guided by political ideology more than professionalism, objectivity, and competence. What if they are the ones who decide who deserves to have their gun rights restored?
