For decades, federal law has treated many felony convictions as a permanent bar to gun ownership, with almost no realistic way back. Now, the Trump administration is moving to change that, aiming to revive a long‑dormant federal gun rights restoration process and turn it into a sweeping national program that could eventually manage up to a million applications a year.
How We Got Here
The Gun Control Act (18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq.) makes it a crime for many people with felony convictions or certain misdemeanor domestic violence offenses to possess firearms. A seldom‑used provision in federal law technically lets the government review requests to restore firearm rights. But in the 90s, Congress cut off the money needed to run that process. In practice, this left most Americans with no real way to legally regain gun ownership after finishing their sentences.
That began to shift after recent Supreme Court Second Amendment cases, which spurred more challenges to lifetime gun bans for nonviolent offenses. In early 2025, President Donald Trump issued an executive order titled “Protecting Second Amendment Rights.” This order directed the Attorney General to review federal actions that might infringe Second Amendment rights and to recommend a plan that strengthens those rights while still taking public safety into account.
Trump’s Order and the New Task Force
The 2025 executive order told the Attorney General to scrutinize agency rules, enforcement policies, litigation positions, and licensing practices that could burden gun ownership under federal law and state law. It highlighted firearms regulations issued from 2021 to 2025 and a policy called “Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement” (a Biden‑era ATF initiative that made it easier for the agency to revoke or deny gun‑dealer licenses for certain compliance violations, rather than relying on warnings or corrective action alone). Trump’s order also flagged the government’s positions in Second Amendment cases as part of a broader review of how federal agencies handle guns.
Soon after, the U.S. Department of Justice created a Second Amendment Enforcement Task Force. According to the Attorney General’s memorandum, the task force is meant to use litigation and policy to safeguard Second Amendment rights. It includes senior officials from the DOJ, the Office of the Solicitor General, the Civil Division, the Criminal Division, the FBI, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). ATF in particular plays a central role in implementing any new rules related to restoring gun rights, since it’s the principal law enforcement agency dealing with firearms.
A Pathway Back to Gun Ownership
In 2025, the DOJ issued a proposed rule to build a formal process for people barred from gun ownership under federal law to seek relief. The proposal would allow felons and other prohibited purchasers to apply to the Department for individualized review, including screening, waiting periods, and case‑by‑case eligibility decisions.
Under that framework, the DOJ anticipates up to one million applications annually once the system is fully operational. The agency plans to staff as many as 50 full‑time employees and create an online portal, charging a modest application fee. The new rule identifies presumptively disqualifying crimes, such as certain violent or sex offenses, and suggests a ten‑year waiting period after serious felony convictions and five years for other offenses.
This process is different from pardons or broader civil rights restoration. Some early applicants had also asked for clemency, but this new route runs separately and looks only at whether someone should legally be allowed to have guns again, without erasing the underlying conviction.
Early Cases and Controversy
Even though a final rule isn’t in place yet, the DOJ has started granting relief in individual cases. Earlier this year, it listed 22 people in the Federal Register whose gun rights were restored after felony convictions, indictments, or other disqualifying events, offering an early look at how the revamped system might work. Their records range from nonviolent drug and fraud offenses to politically charged cases, and several had previously sued the department over the decades‑long shutdown of the old relief process.
The Trump administration has drawn criticism for restoring gun rights in some of the more controversial cases. For example, actor and director Mel Gibson has a prior domestic violence conviction, but the DOJ still approved his application. Internal disputes within the Justice Department’s pardon office over his case have since surfaced in court filings, raising broader questions about how law enforcement agencies weigh public safety, eligibility standards, and fairness when deciding who should be allowed to have guns again. Another example is Arizona state senator Jake Hoffman, who is charged in Arizona’s “fake elector” case and remained under state indictment when his application was approved.
A Second Chance or a Safety Risk?
For gun‑rights groups, the new rule (and the larger push for federal firearm rights restoration) just reins in a system that went too far, permanently disarming people over old, nonviolent cases and shortchanging Second Amendment rights. In their view, the DOJ is finally catching up to the Supreme Court’s recent decisions and giving law‑abiding people who have done their time a real second chance.
Advocates for gun‑violence prevention see something very different. They warn that restoring firearm rights on a large scale could put guns back in the hands of people who are still dangerous, especially in domestic violence situations or other high‑risk settings. Those groups are pressing the Justice Department and ATF to keep the eligibility rules tight in the final rule, to lean on state law, and to work closely with local law enforcement.
Public comments so far suggest broad support for having some kind of way back, but deep disagreement about how wide that door should open. As the Department moves toward a final rule, people with disqualifying convictions or other federal bars will need to watch the details closely — and may want legal advice before deciding whether to apply for restoration of their gun rights.
Related Resources:
- California’s Open‑Carry Regime Struck Down in the City, Survives in the Country (FindLaw’s Federal Courts)
- Flashing a Gun: Self-Defense or ‘Brandishing’? (FindLaw’s Law and Daily Life)
- The Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms (FindLaw’s U.S. Constitution)
