H.R.223 - Preventing Unjust Red Flag Laws Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R. 223, the "Preventing Unjust Red Flag Laws Act of 2025," aims to prohibit federal funding for the implementation and enforcement of federal red flag orders. It also prevents federal agencies from assisting state, local, tribal, or territorial governments in implementing or enforcing such laws. The bill defines "red flag law" as a risk-based, temporary, and preemptive protective order that authorizes the removal of a firearm without due process.
Expected Effects
If enacted, this bill would restrict the federal government's ability to support or enforce red flag laws. States would need to fund and implement these laws independently, if they choose to do so. This could lead to a reduction in the number of red flag laws enacted and enforced across the country.
Potential Benefits
- Protects individual rights by preventing the removal of firearms without due process.
- Limits federal overreach into state law enforcement.
- Ensures that states retain autonomy in deciding whether or not to implement red flag laws.
- Prevents the potential misuse of federal funds for laws that may infringe on Second Amendment rights.
- Upholds the principle of federalism by restricting the federal government's ability to incentivize or coerce states into adopting specific policies.
Potential Disadvantages
- May hinder efforts to prevent gun violence by limiting the use of red flag laws.
- Could lead to inconsistencies in gun safety regulations across different states.
- May reduce the ability of law enforcement to intervene in potentially dangerous situations.
- Could be perceived as prioritizing gun rights over public safety.
- May face legal challenges based on arguments that it infringes on states' rights to address gun violence.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the Constitution is complex. Proponents argue it protects Second Amendment rights and due process rights outlined in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Opponents may argue that it infringes upon the government's ability to ensure public safety, potentially conflicting with the government's responsibility to "insure domestic Tranquility" as stated in the Constitution's preamble. The Tenth Amendment, reserving powers not delegated to the federal government to the states, is also relevant.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).