691:
deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim. (B) (i) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter, unless— (I) the person was represented by counsel in the case, or knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and (II) in the case of a prosecution for an offense described in this paragraph for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried, either (aa) the case was tried by a jury, or (bb) the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise. (ii) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense) unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
49:
445:
requirement says that the relationship must be both sexual and involve cohabitation or a child in common. A Brady indicator trigger is generated when the requirements apply, resulting in the restraining order being noted in a federal database as prohibiting the possession of firearms. However, the state forms used for restraining orders do not always clearly indicate whether the specific federal criteria apply, making it difficult to determine whether the firearms restriction applies without a detailed reading of the order, the petition, and other court records.
404:
394:(ii) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the applicable jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights under such an offense) unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
251:
459:(No. 99-10331) (5th Cir. 2001). See also U.S. v. Emerson, 231 Fed. Appx. 349 (5th Cir. 2007) (Same defendant seeking review of judgment). The case involved a challenge to the Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)(C)(ii), a federal statute that prohibited the transportation of firearms or ammunition in interstate commerce by persons subject to a court order that, by its explicit terms, prohibits the use of physical force against an intimate partner or child.
690:
18 USC 921(a)(33): (33) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), the term "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" means an offense that— (i) is a misdemeanor under
Federal, State, or Tribal  law; and (ii) has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a
520:
ruled that the
Lautenberg amendment is constitutional. Chovan claimed that his civil rights had been restored due to California law, but according to federal law, his rights had never been restored. The court also stated that a person cannot have their civil rights restored if they were never taken
444:
The hearing requirement ensures that the firearms restrictions will not apply after an initial ex parte hearing during which a temporary order is granted, but only after a longer term order is granted following a hearing in which both parties have the opportunity to be heard. The intimate partner
415:
included a provision restricting respondents to final protective orders from possessing, receiving, transporting, or shipping firearms or ammunition. For restrictions arising from a restraining order there are several requirements before the restrictions apply as follows:
544:
state law. Specifically holding that the ""physical force" requirement is satisfied by the degree of force that supports a common-law battery conviction — namely, offensive touching", thereby preventing him from possession of firearms. Most recently, the
Supreme Court in
463:
does not address the portion of the
Lautenberg Amendment involving conviction for misdemeanor domestic violence. It was initially overturned in 1999 for being unconstitutional, but that case was reversed upon appeal in 2001.
530:(2009), the Supreme Court held that the predicate offense does not need to include a domestic relationship as an element, so long as a domestic relationship did in fact exist between the perpetrator and the victim.
326:
in 1996, which bans access to firearms for life by people convicted of crimes of domestic violence. The act is often referred to as "the
Lautenberg Amendment" after its sponsor, Senator
358:
and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The act also makes it unlawful to knowingly sell or give a firearm or ammunition to such persons.
110:
381:(II) in the case of a prosecution for an offense described in this paragraph for which a person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction in which the case was tried, either
884:
805:
536:(2014) challenged the application of the law to misdemeanor convictions which did not involve "the use or attempted use of physical force". In a 9–0 decision, the
783:
769:
350:
The act bans shipment, transport, possession, ownership, and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. The
517:
331:
509:
where it was ruled that the threat of being subjected to the gun ban did not turn an otherwise "petty" crime into a "serious" one requiring a jury trial.
989:
984:
643:
88:
59:
979:
190:
212:
73:
627:"Criminal Resource Manual 1117 Restrictions on the Possession of Firearms by Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence"
237:
28:
540:
held that
Castleman's conviction of "misdemeanor domestic assault" did qualify as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" under
378:(I) the person was represented by counsel in the case, or knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel in the case; and
279:
951:
180:
165:
551:, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), decided that the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban in U.S. federal law extends to those convicted of
140:
95:
296:, often called the "Lautenberg Amendment" ("Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence",
387:(bb) the person knowingly and intelligently waived the right to have the case tried by a jury, by guilty plea or otherwise.
105:
959:
537:
363:
314:
375:(i) A person shall not be considered to have been convicted of such an offense for purposes of this chapter, unless—
185:
155:
100:
903:
521:
away in the first place since the
Lautenberg amendment does not take away a person’s right to vote or be on a jury.
612:
566:
78:
862:
207:
946:
626:
587:
145:
24:
323:
160:
130:
20:
657:
439:—defendant must be deemed a credible threat to the petitioner or be barred from the use of physical force
309:
272:
125:
532:
412:
297:
217:
175:
547:
455:
170:
135:
306:
335:
150:
917:
573:
because it makes the
Lautenberg Amendment apply to people in a significant dating relationship.
846:
526:
265:
197:
48:
351:
255:
115:
367:
322:), is an amendment to the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, enacted by the
8:
740:
471:, 185 F.3d 693 (7th Cir. 1999) also challenged this law, and the case was rejected. The
582:
570:
552:
827:
555:
398:
318:
227:
956:
327:
232:
592:
403:
68:
434:—must restrain the defendant from harassing, stalking, or threatening behavior
973:
473:
339:
222:
885:"Supreme Court Rules Domestic Abusers Can Lose Their Gun-Ownership Rights"
713:
354:
and subsequent amendments had previously prohibited anyone convicted of a
338:
of the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. President
334:, involving underenforcement of domestic violence laws brought under the
202:
19:
This article is about a United States law. For other related topics, see
904:"The Supreme Court quietly handed gun control advocates a small victory"
863:"How Bad Does Domestic Violence Have to Be Before You Can't Have a Gun?"
83:
484:, 26 F.3d 282 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 246 (1994) (denying
453:
This law has been tested but supported in federal court with the case
562:
541:
424:—the defendant must have had the opportunity to be heard at a hearing
330:(D-NJ). Lautenberg proposed the amendment after a decision from the
770:"US V. Emerson, 270 F. 3d 203 - Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 2001"
644:"US v. Chovan, 735 F. 3d 1127 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2013"
964:
399:
Restraining order restrictions (preceded the
Lautenberg Amendment)
342:
signed the law as part of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1997.
741:"Confronting the Issue of Gun Seizure in Domestic Violence Cases"
355:
748:
Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts
27:. For the US refugee program for religious minorities, see
29:
Jackson–Vanik amendment § Lautenberg Amendment (1990)
429:—the defendant and petitioner must be intimate partners
714:"Protection Orders and Federal Firearms Restrictions"
518:
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
332:
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
407:
Restraining order noting the potential firearms ban
298:
840:
971:
947:Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual
810:, vol. 185, December 3, 1998, p. 693
361:The definition of 'convicted' can be found in
23:. For the gun violence restraining order, see
273:
918:"S.2938 - Bipartisan Safer Communities Act"
498:based challenge to a 922(g)(4) conviction).
990:United States federal firearms legislation
985:United States federal criminal legislation
788:, vol. 46, April 7, 1999, p. 598
720:. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
469:Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis, Indiana
280:
266:
477:aspects of the law were challenged with:
980:Acts of the 104th United States Congress
488:challenge to a 922(g)(1) conviction) and
402:
882:
213:Right to keep and bear arms in the U.S.
186:International treaties for arms control
972:
957:Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence
708:
706:
660:Wynn John Terre v. City of Los Angeles
181:History of concealed carry in the U.S.
901:
384:(aa) the case was tried by a jury, or
96:Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
738:
732:
638:
636:
502:Both of the challenges were denied.
703:
13:
413:Violence Against Women Act of 1994
303:Tooltip Public Law (United States)
294:Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban
121:Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban
14:
1001:
940:
807:Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis
633:
505:Likewise this law was invoked in
437:Credible Threat or Physical Force
156:Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA)
111:Connecticut Children's Safety Act
883:Johnson, Carrie (27 June 2016).
567:Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
448:
249:
79:Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
47:
910:
895:
876:
855:
820:
798:
776:
902:Lopez, German (27 June 2016).
762:
694:
684:
650:
619:
605:
494:, 23 F.3d 29 (2nd Cir. 1994) (
193:Background Check System (NICS)
1:
952:The Consumer Law Page Article
598:
588:Firearm Owners Protection Act
166:Gun laws in the U.S. by state
146:Firearm Owners Protection Act
91:Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
25:Extreme Risk Protection Order
324:104th United States Congress
131:Federal Firearms Act of 1938
21:Outline of domestic violence
7:
828:"Order striking jury trial"
576:
538:United States Supreme Court
198:National Firearms Act (NFA)
126:Federal Assault Weapons Ban
106:Concealed carry in the U.S.
89:Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
74:Assault weapons legislation
37:Firearm legal topics of the
10:
1006:
848:United States v. Castleman
533:United States v. Castleman
345:
218:Second Amendment sanctuary
176:High-capacity magazine ban
18:
191:National Instant Criminal
548:Voisine v. United States
456:United States v. Emerson
432:Restrains Future Contact
256:United States portal
171:Gun politics in the U.S.
136:Federal Firearms License
101:Campus carry in the U.S.
565:signed into effect the
514:United States vs Chovan
507:United States v. Jardee
492:United States v. Waters
368:§ 921(a)(33)(B)(i)
336:Equal Protection Clause
240:and Law Enforcement Act
223:Sullivan Act (New York)
151:Gun Control Act of 1968
527:United States v. Hayes
482:United States v. Brady
442:
408:
208:Open carry in the U.S.
418:
406:
238:Violent Crime Control
739:Sack, Emily (2005).
371:and has exceptions:
352:1968 Gun Control Act
116:Constitutional carry
629:. 19 February 2015.
613:"Domestic Violence"
161:Gun law in the U.S.
583:Boyfriend loophole
571:boyfriend loophole
569:. It narrowed the
561:In 2022 President
409:
924:. October 5, 2021
852:, March 26, 2014.
615:. 4 January 2021.
556:domestic violence
290:
289:
997:
965:The Emerson Case
934:
933:
931:
929:
914:
908:
907:
899:
893:
892:
880:
874:
873:
871:
870:
859:
853:
844:
838:
837:
835:
834:
824:
818:
817:
816:
815:
802:
796:
795:
794:
793:
780:
774:
773:
766:
760:
759:
757:
755:
745:
736:
730:
729:
727:
725:
710:
701:
700:18 USC 922(g)(8)
698:
692:
688:
682:
681:
679:
677:
658:"51 F. 3d 284 -
654:
648:
647:
640:
631:
630:
623:
617:
616:
609:
427:Intimate Partner
370:
328:Frank Lautenberg
321:
319:§ 922(g)(9)
304:
300:
282:
275:
268:
254:
253:
252:
233:Tiahrt Amendment
141:Firearm case law
51:
34:
33:
1005:
1004:
1000:
999:
998:
996:
995:
994:
970:
969:
943:
938:
937:
927:
925:
916:
915:
911:
900:
896:
881:
877:
868:
866:
861:
860:
856:
845:
841:
832:
830:
826:
825:
821:
813:
811:
804:
803:
799:
791:
789:
782:
781:
777:
768:
767:
763:
753:
751:
743:
737:
733:
723:
721:
712:
711:
704:
699:
695:
689:
685:
675:
673:
672:(51): 284. 1995
656:
655:
651:
642:
641:
634:
625:
624:
620:
611:
610:
606:
601:
593:Gun Control Act
579:
451:
441:
435:
430:
425:
401:
362:
348:
313:
302:
286:
250:
248:
239:
192:
90:
65:
32:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1003:
993:
992:
987:
982:
968:
967:
962:
954:
949:
942:
941:External links
939:
936:
935:
909:
894:
875:
854:
839:
819:
797:
775:
761:
731:
702:
693:
683:
649:
632:
618:
603:
602:
600:
597:
596:
595:
590:
585:
578:
575:
500:
499:
489:
450:
447:
419:
400:
397:
396:
395:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
385:
379:
347:
344:
307:104–208 (text)
288:
287:
285:
284:
277:
270:
262:
259:
258:
245:
244:
243:
242:
235:
230:
225:
220:
215:
210:
205:
200:
195:
188:
183:
178:
173:
168:
163:
158:
153:
148:
143:
138:
133:
128:
123:
118:
113:
108:
103:
98:
93:
86:
81:
76:
71:
69:Assault weapon
64:
63:
53:
52:
44:
43:
39:
38:
16:US federal law
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1002:
991:
988:
986:
983:
981:
978:
977:
975:
966:
963:
961:
958:
955:
953:
950:
948:
945:
944:
923:
919:
913:
905:
898:
890:
886:
879:
864:
858:
851:
849:
843:
829:
823:
809:
808:
801:
787:
786:
785:US v. Emerson
779:
771:
765:
749:
742:
735:
719:
715:
709:
707:
697:
687:
671:
667:
663:
661:
653:
645:
639:
637:
628:
622:
614:
608:
604:
594:
591:
589:
586:
584:
581:
580:
574:
572:
568:
564:
559:
557:
554:
550:
549:
543:
539:
535:
534:
529:
528:
522:
519:
515:
510:
508:
503:
497:
496:ex post facto
493:
490:
487:
486:ex post facto
483:
480:
479:
478:
476:
475:
474:ex post facto
470:
465:
462:
458:
457:
449:Court history
446:
440:
438:
433:
428:
423:
417:
414:
405:
393:
386:
383:
382:
380:
377:
376:
374:
373:
372:
369:
365:
359:
357:
353:
343:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
320:
316:
311:
308:
301:
295:
283:
278:
276:
271:
269:
264:
263:
261:
260:
257:
247:
246:
241:
236:
234:
231:
229:
226:
224:
221:
219:
216:
214:
211:
209:
206:
204:
201:
199:
196:
194:
189:
187:
184:
182:
179:
177:
174:
172:
169:
167:
164:
162:
159:
157:
154:
152:
149:
147:
144:
142:
139:
137:
134:
132:
129:
127:
124:
122:
119:
117:
114:
112:
109:
107:
104:
102:
99:
97:
94:
92:
87:
85:
82:
80:
77:
75:
72:
70:
67:
66:
62:
61:
57:
56:
55:
54:
50:
46:
45:
42:United States
41:
40:
36:
35:
30:
26:
22:
926:. Retrieved
922:Congress.gov
921:
912:
897:
888:
878:
867:. Retrieved
865:. 2016-02-22
857:
847:
842:
831:. Retrieved
822:
812:, retrieved
806:
800:
790:, retrieved
784:
778:
764:
752:. Retrieved
747:
734:
722:. Retrieved
717:
696:
686:
674:. Retrieved
669:
665:
659:
652:
621:
607:
560:
546:
531:
525:
523:
516:(2013), the
513:
511:
506:
504:
501:
495:
491:
485:
481:
472:
468:
466:
460:
454:
452:
443:
436:
431:
426:
421:
420:
410:
360:
349:
340:Bill Clinton
293:
291:
120:
60:Amendment II
58:
203:NY SAFE Act
84:Bump stocks
974:Categories
869:2016-06-27
833:2010-03-13
814:2024-02-16
792:2024-04-04
754:25 January
666:OpenJurist
599:References
228:Suppressor
750:(6): 3–30
563:Joe Biden
542:Tennessee
467:The case
364:18 U.S.C.
315:18 U.S.C.
928:April 4,
577:See also
553:reckless
960:archive
772:. 2001.
646:. 2013.
461:Emerson
422:Hearing
346:Summary
299:Pub. L.
850:(2014)
676:19 May
366:
356:felony
317:
305:
744:(PDF)
724:5 Nov
310:(PDF)
930:2024
756:2017
726:2017
718:BATF
678:2020
411:The
292:The
889:NPR
670:F3d
524:In
512:In
976::
920:.
887:.
746:.
716:.
705:^
668:.
664:.
635:^
558:.
312:,
932:.
906:.
891:.
872:.
836:.
758:.
728:.
680:.
662:"
281:e
274:t
267:v
31:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
