Toward a State-Led Gun Policy
In the absence of federal action, states lead the way on gun safety
In the last 100 days, much has changed on the gun safety front at the national level. But given the frenzied rollout of changes across the federal government, it was easy to miss every executive order, policy rollback, or court challenge.
In recognition of this new environment, we’re introducing Under the Radar to keep you informed about what you may have missed. We’re kicking it off this week with a summary of what’s occurred under the administration to date. Moving forward, we’ll keep this space updated in every issue.
On February 7, President Trump signed Executive Order 14206, which includes the following directives:
Requires a review of all federal actions from 2021–2025 that may have “restricted Second Amendment rights.” This includes vital firearm regulations, enforcement policies, and gun classification decisions.
Requires the Attorney General to evaluate rules by DOJ, ATF, and other agencies to identify policies that can be removed due to “overreach.”
Requires a plan to reverse vital gun violence prevention policies to be submitted to the President within 30 days.
Department and Agency Changes
The administration removed a public health advisory that declares gun violence a public health crisis from the Surgeon General’s website.
The administration terminated the ATF’s policy of zero tolerance for gun dealers who willfully violate the law.
The administration made drastic cuts to the workforce of the CDC and NIH, which oversee public health programs related to gun violence.
The administration removed the Office of Gun Violence Prevention from the White House website, meaning that for all intents and purposes, it is shuttered.
Other Moves
The administration has cut hundreds of millions of dollars of grant funding to projects working to prevent gun violence.
The Justice Department has launched an investigation of Los Angeles County over its gun permitting process.
The Justice Department is restoring gun ownership rights for some people convicted of domestic abuse. Among them is actor Mel Gibson, who pleaded no contest in 2011 to a battery charge involving his former girlfriend.
As we are unlikely to see much movement on gun safety at the federal level in the coming four years, states will take the lead on policy. Which states can we expect to take action, and on what issues?
Colorado is a good place to start. Earlier this month, Gov. Jared Polis signed into law legislation that makes it illegal to buy, sell, or make most semi-automatic firearms without background checks and training. Further, back in January, Attorney General Phil Weiser announced that he was allying with more than a dozen states to protect gun regulation in anticipation of attacks from the Executive Branch. These included Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.
Weiser emphasized that regulation of forced reset triggers and background checks are priorities. The latter was a critical part of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which is under threat since President Trump announced a review of federal firearms regulations that is expected to broadly relax these rules.
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin announced a similar partnership last year, with 16 states committing to stronger civil enforcement of gun regulation. These include the Attorneys General of Connecticut, Maryland, California, Delaware, Washington, and Washington, D.C. Several enforcement claims have already been pursued by these states, including a settlement of $3 million to Washington against a retailer selling large-capacity magazines, and one of $885,000 to Connecticut by out-of-state dealers selling ghost gun parts.
Opposition to ghost guns remains a unifying issue, as even the U.S. Supreme Court upheld rules requiring background checks for the DIY firearms. At 97Percent, our recent national survey of gun-owning voters showed that while familiarity with ghost guns remains on the low side, support for standardizing ghost gun kits and firearm piece purchases with serial numbers is high, at 63%.
Several legislative efforts are underway aiming to regulate the sale of firearms to prevent unsafe individuals from purchasing them. In Washington, the State House sent legislation to the governor’s desk this week that requires gun buyers to apply for a five-year permit from the Washington State Patrol. To qualify, applicants must pay a fee and complete a certified firearms safety training program. Michigan took action earlier this year, enacting a gun buyback program and school safety package aiming to standardize and improve communication during emergencies. Gun safety advocates and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer are calling for more reforms.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has recently declined to hear a challenge to Maryland’s law that requires a permit to purchase a handgun. This legal victory has hastened the introduction of a bill that would create a federal grant program incentivizing permit-to-purchase regulation at the state level, though in the current national political climate, it seems unlikely to succeed. Minnesota wasn’t as fortunate. The state can no longer enforce its law barring people younger than 21 years old from obtaining a permit to carry a handgun in public after the Supreme Court refused to hear its appeal of a judicial decision deeming the law unconstitutional.
There’s activity on the opposite side of the issue, too. In Arizona, State Rep. Alexander Kolodin has advocated for the relaxation of bans on everything from silencers to machine guns to pipe bombs. His proposal would also prevent local prosecutors from enforcing national regulations on them. Less extreme examples include Minnesota, which recently enacted a law allowing people to carry an uncased, unloaded firearm in motor vehicles under certain conditions, and North Carolina, where lawmakers are pushing for concealed carry to be allowed without a permit.
What can we expect to see going forward?
As per usual, majority blue states will continue pushing for gun safety regulation while majority red states continue to roll back their own, taking little action to fill the void left by revoked federal gun policy. However, in swing states, the outlook is more vague. For example, the fate of gun safety in Arizona depends on the outcome of Kolodin’s bill and his ability to mobilize other lawmakers.
But one thing is clear: for the many Americans in states without strong gun regulation, this is a very uncertain time.
We are committed to our mission.
97Percent is working across the gun owner/non-gun owner divide—which isn’t as wide as we’re often led to believe—to promote policies 1) that are proven effective at reducing gun deaths, and 2) that our research shows have majority support among Americans.
We recently hosted a gun safety symposium, Bridging the Divide: Firearm Owners and Non-Owners Working Together on a Policy to Promote Health, that addressed these topics head-on and explored how policymakers, law enforcement, academics, activists, and other stakeholders can help bridge the cultural and political divide to enact lasting and effective gun safety policy.
If you missed it, the entire symposium is available on our website here:
On what needs to happen next:
Do you have a comment about any of these critical issues? Do you have a story to share? We’d love to hear from you. Please include your first name and state, and we may publish it in a future issue. Thank you for reading!
For more information about 97Percent, please visit our website at 97Percent.us.
Join our growing community of gun owners and non-gun owners united to reduce gun deaths in America.