Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
House Judiciary Committee hears testimony on firearm relinquishment, FFL liability and third‑party storage
Loading...
Summary
The House Judiciary Committee heard testimony and stakeholder input on draft language to clarify how firearms are relinquished under domestic-violence and other court orders, including proposals to allow third‑party custody, extend liability protections to FFLs that follow notice procedures, and a 90‑day abandoned‑property framework for unclaimed firearms.
The House Judiciary Committee met April 24 to consider draft changes to how firearms are handled when courts order relinquishment, hearing testimony from stakeholders, an Attorney General’s Office representative and FFL (federally licensed firearm) holders on liability, notice and storage procedures.
Chris Bradley, president of the regional sportsman clubs, told the committee he reviewed decades of cases and raised questions about how often relinquishment orders are issued and honored. “From 1994 to 2024, there were 457 homicides,” Bradley said, and he told the committee 204 of those were determined to be domestic‑violence related by the review commission he cited; he said most of those victims had no RFA in place. Bradley also cited courtroom figures he said showed roughly 3,200 petitions filed in a recent period with 1,069 immediately dismissed and more than 14,000 temporary orders issued, many of which did not become final. He urged the committee to build data collection into the process so lawmakers can know how often judges order relinquishment and whether it is honored.
An Attorney General’s Office staff member framed the draft amendment as narrowly focused on preventing people subject to court orders from accessing firearms, not as a new gun‑control measure. “This is not about restricting ... carriers, regular gun owners,” the staff member said. The office emphasized balancing due‑process and property rights while making it clearer how courts, law enforcement and third parties should handle firearms subject to relinquishment orders.
Committee members and stakeholders focused on three operational issues: (1) how third‑party custody will be approved and vetted, (2) whether federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs) will receive liability protection equivalent to law enforcement if they store firearms under court orders and follow required procedures, and (3) how abandoned‑property rules and proceeds from sales should be handled if an owner fails to reclaim firearms.
FFL owners who testified said unclear liability and the inability to recover storage costs have discouraged participation. One FFL witness who sat on the stakeholder committee said the business community needs clear, “black‑and‑white” rules and a way to recover storage fees or proceeds. The Attorney General’s Office staff confirmed the draft would give FFLs immunity comparable to law enforcement’s if they follow the notice and sale procedures the bill sets out and follow required background‑check and affidavit steps for third parties.
Members discussed preserving a narrow role for third parties — intended as an exception when law enforcement or an FFL cannot store firearms — and requiring the court to vet proposed third‑party custodians and require background checks. Committee members also pressed for a standardized notice and receipt provided to defendants and owners at the time firearms are taken into custody, with clear language about the 90‑day abandoned‑property timeline and owners’ responsibilities to keep contact information current.
The Chair proposed a drafting substitution to strike specified language in the current bill and insert the committee’s relinquishment and storage language for further consideration; no vote on the substitution was recorded in the transcript. Committee staff said they would return with updated draft language reflecting stakeholder input.
What happens next: staff will prepare a revised draft that incorporates the committee’s direction on third‑party vetting, FFL immunity when procedural safeguards are followed, and notice/receipt requirements; the committee did not take a final vote during the hearing.
Sources: transcript of House Judiciary Committee hearing, testimony from Chris Bradley (president, regional sportsman clubs), an Attorney General’s Office staff member, and an FFL owner who served on the stakeholder committee.
