Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2026

The bill creates a new federal court order called a Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order. A family or household member, or a law enforcement officer, can ask a federal district court to temporarily block a named person from buying, having, or receiving firearms or ammunition. The person covered by the order is called the respondent, and the person who files is the petitioner. Courts can issue two types of orders. First, an emergency “ex parte” order can be issued quickly, without the respondent present, if the judge finds probable cause that the person poses an imminent risk of harming themselves or others with a gun. This emergency order can last up to 14 days. Second, a longer-term order, up to 180 days, can be issued only after a court hearing where the respondent has notice, a chance to be heard, and the right to a lawyer (with court-provided counsel if they cannot afford one, to the extent practicable). For a long-term order, the judge must find by clear and convincing evidence that the person poses a risk of injury to self or others if they have access to firearms or ammunition. When a federal order is issued, the court must require the respondent to surrender all firearms, ammunition, and gun permits they own or possess in or affecting interstate commerce. These items go to the U.S. Marshals Service or a designated law enforcement officer. Officers serving the order request immediate surrender and can take items that are surrendered, in plain sight, or lawfully discovered. If they cannot collect them at service, the respondent must turn them in within 48 hours. The Marshals must provide a written receipt and file it with the court. If someone tries to get these items back in violation of an order, the items can be seized and forfeited. Once an order ends or is dissolved, the court directs the Marshals to check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and other databases whether the respondent can legally have guns. If they may lawfully possess, the court orders the guns, ammunition, and permits returned; if not, return is delayed until the person becomes legally eligible. If the court finds that some of the seized firearms or ammunition actually belong to someone else, it can direct transfer to the lawful owner, as long as that person can legally possess them and will not give the respondent access. The bill lists factors a judge must and may consider when deciding whether to issue an order, such as recent threats or acts of violence, self-harm, cruelty to animals, substance abuse linked to threats or violence, reckless display of firearms, history of violence, and explicit or implicit threats. It creates penalties for people who knowingly file false or frivolous petitions, including fines up to $5,000 and prison up to 5 years. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts must develop a model policy to make these orders easy to use, including outreach, after-hours filing, and coordination with law enforcement and community groups. The bill changes federal gun law so that people who are subject to a federal ERPO, or to certain qualifying state or Tribal ERPOs, are prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving, or possessing firearms or ammunition, and others are barred from selling or transferring guns to them. It also directs federal law enforcement agencies to train their officers in fair and safe use of federal ERPOs, including training on bias, domestic violence situations, crisis response, community outreach, and referral to social services. Beyond the federal process, the bill creates a grant program run by the Department of Justice’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. States, Tribes, and some local or other entities can apply if their own ERPO laws meet certain standards, such as allowing petitions, requiring notice and a hearing, providing a process for ex parte and full orders, handling firearm storage and return, and reporting orders into NICS. Grant funds can be used for training, court and law enforcement capacity, protocols, and public awareness, and a set share (25–70%) must go to law enforcement training. The bill also gives preference in some DOJ grants to States and Tribes with qualifying ERPO laws. The bill updates federal identification record laws so that the FBI can collect and store records of people subject to ERPOs from federal, state, Tribal, and other courts, and must destroy those records when the orders expire or are ended. It allows ERPOs to be included in national crime information databases, and lets agencies access that information. It also requires that ERPOs issued under compliant state or Tribal laws receive “full faith and credit,” meaning they are to be enforced by courts and law enforcement in other States and Tribes as if issued there, as long as the original court had jurisdiction and provided notice and an opportunity to be heard. The bill states that it does not change existing federal rules about domestic violence protective orders, and it does not override any state law on the subject (no preemption). It includes a severability clause so if one part is struck down in court, the rest may still stand. The entire Act and its changes to law would begin to apply 180 days after enactment.

This bill would create a nationwide federal option to temporarily limit access to guns and ammunition for people a court finds are at serious risk of hurting themselves or others. That could be relevant in situations involving suicide risk, domestic violence, or threats of public violence, especially where other tools may not clearly apply. It also ties these orders into the existing background check system, so that covered individuals cannot legally buy guns during the order period. For families, friends, and law enforcement, the bill lays out a specific process to ask a federal court for help, with set timelines, evidence standards, and rights for the person named. The rules on notice, hearings, right to counsel, and penalties for false petitions are meant to set guardrails around when and how orders are used. However, how often and in what kinds of cases these orders would be sought and granted, and their effects on gun injuries and deaths, would depend on future use and enforcement and is not fully predictable from the bill’s text. For states, Tribes, and local governments, the grant program and national data rules could encourage adoption or expansion of ERPO laws and more consistent training and reporting. The “full faith and credit” section aims to ensure an order follows a person across state and Tribal lines, helping courts and police in different places work from the same information. At the same time, the bill leaves existing state policies in place, so there could be variation in how ERPOs operate from one jurisdiction to another.

• Allows family or household members and law enforcement officers to petition federal district courts for emergency (ex parte) and long-term federal extreme risk protection orders.
• Emergency ex parte orders require probable cause of an imminent risk of personal injury with a firearm or ammunition and last up to 14 days.
• Long-term orders require a court hearing, with notice, right to be heard, and access to counsel, and must be supported by clear and convincing evidence of risk; they can last up to 180 days and be renewed.
• Respondents must surrender all firearms, ammunition, and firearm permits they own or possess in or affecting interstate commerce to the U.S. Marshals Service or a designated law enforcement officer within set timeframes.
• The U.S. Marshals Service must issue receipts for surrendered items, file them with the court, and confirm legal eligibility through NICS before items are returned after an order ends.
• Attempting to access surrendered firearms, ammunition, or permits in violation of an order makes those items subject to federal seizure and forfeiture.
• Filing knowingly false or frivolous petitions can be punished by fines up to $5,000, imprisonment up to 5 years, or both.
• The Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts must create a model policy for making federal ERPOs accessible, including after-hours filing and outreach to the public and law enforcement.
• Federal law is amended so that being subject to a qualifying federal or state/Tribal ERPO bars a person from receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d) and (g).
• Establishes a DOJ grant program for States, Tribes, and certain local or other entities with ERPO laws that meet due process, notice, hearing, storage, and reporting standards.
• At least 25% and no more than 70% of each grant must support law enforcement training on ERPO use, including bias, domestic violence, crisis intervention, and referrals to services.
• Requires grantees and the federal courts to submit annual data reports on petitions, orders, renewals, penalties, demographics of petitioners and respondents (if available), and number of firearms removed.
• Authorizes the FBI to collect records of individuals subject to ERPOs in national crime information databases and requires destruction of those records when orders expire or are terminated.
• Requires full faith and credit for compliant state and Tribal ERPOs, so they are enforceable in other States and Tribal jurisdictions if jurisdiction and due process standards are met.
• Specifies that the Act does not preempt state law and does not change existing federal rules on domestic violence protective orders.
• Provides that the Act and its amendments take effect 180 days after enactment.

• The federal ERPO provisions do not override state ERPO laws; both can exist side by side, and federal law is written not to preempt state policy in this area.
• People subject to certain state or Tribal ERPOs can become federally prohibited from possessing firearms even if the state’s own penalties are limited, once their orders are reported into NICS.
• The FBI must destroy ERPO-related identification records when the order ends, but other records (such as court files) may still exist under separate laws.
• The bill calls for extensive demographic and outcome reporting on ERPO use, which can highlight patterns in how the law is applied, including any disparities.
• Tribal courts are given explicit authority to issue and enforce protection orders involving any person within their jurisdiction, which may expand how ERPOs function in Indian Country compared with current practice.
• The requirement that 25–70% of certain grants be used for law enforcement training limits how much grantees can devote to other uses, such as public education or administrative systems.
• Firearms owned by someone other than the respondent can be transferred back to that owner during an order, but only if the court is satisfied the respondent will not have access, which may affect shared households or family property.
• The Act’s severability clause means that if a court strikes down specific features (such as a particular procedure), other parts of the ERPO system could remain in effect.