Attorney General Pam Bondi has launched a Department of Justice (DOJ) working group to review and potentially restore gun rights for individuals with past convictions. This effort, part of the broader Trump administration agenda, signals a shift toward reexamining firearm prohibitions for nonviolent offenders. According to Mark W. Smith of The Four Boxes Diner, this move is designed to expand Second Amendment protections while aligning with recent Supreme Court precedents.
The Background of This Move
The creation of this working group follows the dismissal of Elizabeth Oyer, the former DOJ pardon attorney after she refused to recommend that actor Mel Gibson have his gun rights restored. Devlin Barrett of The New York Times reported that Oyer’s firing has raised concerns about political interference in the Justice Department’s decision-making process.
Tying Gun Rights Restoration to Supreme Court Precedents
Smith explained that this initiative builds on the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Rahimi, which upheld the idea that individuals can be disarmed if deemed a violent danger to society. However, the ruling also suggested that firearm restrictions should be temporary rather than lifelong. The DOJ working group appears to be using this precedent to evaluate cases where individuals have lost their gun rights but no longer pose a risk.
Additionally, Smith noted that Judge Amy Coney Barrett had previously argued in a dissenting opinion that nonviolent felons should not be permanently disarmed. This perspective has influenced several recent court decisions, including Range v. Garland, which found that prohibiting a man from owning firearms due to a decades-old food stamp fraud conviction was unconstitutional.
A Shift in DOJ Policy Under Trump
The Trump administration’s approach marks a significant departure from previous federal policies. As Smith pointed out, federal law technically allows the DOJ to restore firearm rights, but this process has been defunded for years due to political opposition from both parties. Now, under Bondi’s leadership, the DOJ is working to revive and reshape this mechanism.
According to Barrett’s reporting, Oyer was assigned to a DOJ working group tasked with identifying individuals who could have their gun rights restored. Initially, her office compiled a list of 95 candidates – primarily people whose convictions were decades old and who posed little risk of reoffending. However, senior officials ultimately reduced this list to just nine individuals.
The Controversy Over Mel Gibson’s Inclusion
The controversy surrounding the working group erupted when Oyer was directed to add Mel Gibson to the list. Gibson, a vocal Trump supporter, had lost his gun rights due to a 2011 domestic violence conviction. Barrett reported that Oyer resisted this directive, arguing that there had been no thorough investigation into whether Gibson should have his rights restored.
“This is dangerous. This isn’t political – this is a safety issue,” Oyer told The New York Times, emphasizing the risks of restoring gun rights to individuals with domestic violence histories. After refusing to include Gibson, Oyer was fired the next day.
Political Pressure and Concerns of Favoritism
Barrett’s investigation revealed that Gibson’s lawyer had personally lobbied senior DOJ officials for gun rights restoration. He cited Gibson’s recent appointment as a “special ambassador” to Hollywood by Trump and argued that Gibson had produced successful films.
To Oyer, these justifications were alarming. “Giving guns back to domestic abusers is a serious matter that, in my view, is not something that I could recommend lightly,” she said. She also recalled a senior DOJ official pressuring her by emphasizing Gibson’s personal ties to Trump, warning that she “would be wise” to approve the request.
A Larger Policy Goal?
According to Smith, the Trump administration is pursuing a larger strategy beyond Gibson’s case. The DOJ is reportedly exploring ways to rewrite its regulations to give the attorney general broader authority to restore gun rights. Barrett confirmed that within the working group, government lawyers generally agreed that a significant period – perhaps 10 or 15 years – should pass before a convicted individual could be considered for firearm rights restoration.
However, Barrett noted that the issue of domestic violence remains a sticking point, with officials debating whether such individuals should ever regain their gun rights. Oyer was particularly troubled by discussions of making the process more “automated” rather than case-by-case.
Balancing Rights and Public Safety
Smith framed the working group’s mission as part of a broader Second Amendment expansion effort, arguing that nonviolent offenders should not face lifelong firearm bans. He emphasized that many past convictions – particularly misdemeanors – do not reflect a long-term threat to public safety.
Barrett, however, highlighted concerns that this initiative could prioritize political allies while disregarding standard legal procedures. Oyer’s dismissal, in particular, raises questions about whether decisions are being made based on merit or political loyalty.
The Battle Over DOJ Independence
The working group’s formation and Oyer’s firing reflect a broader struggle over the independence of the Justice Department. Critics argue that the administration is using DOJ policy to reward political allies, while supporters claim this is a long-overdue correction of unfair firearm restrictions.
Barrett pointed out that Trump has frequently bypassed the traditional pardon process, instead granting clemency based on personal relationships or political considerations. The current gun rights restoration effort appears to follow a similar pattern, raising concerns about selective enforcement.
Implications for Gun Policy Moving Forward
The DOJ’s review of gun rights restoration has the potential to reshape firearm laws across the country. If Bondi succeeds in expanding this program, it could provide a pathway for thousands of Americans to regain their Second Amendment rights. However, as Barrett noted, the process remains highly politicized, and its long-term impact remains uncertain.
Smith remains optimistic, viewing this effort as a critical step toward restoring constitutional rights. “This is huge,” he said, “because what this is saying is that the Department of Justice is going to redo their regulations about who can have their Second Amendment rights restored.”
The Road Ahead
As the DOJ working group continues its review, the debate over firearm rights restoration is far from over. The balance between protecting public safety and ensuring constitutional rights will remain a contentious issue, especially in an election year.
While the Trump administration pushes forward with this initiative, critics like Oyer warn that the consequences of hastily restoring gun rights could be severe. Whether this effort ultimately strengthens Second Amendment protections or becomes a cautionary tale of political influence remains to be seen.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.