Pared-down gun seizure bill clears second committee

By Lily Alexander and Patrick Lohmann

A bill that would make it easier and faster for police to seize guns belonging to a person deemed a risk to themselves or others passed a judiciary committee test Feb. 5 afternoon on a party-line vote.

A more-expansive version of the bill was among Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s legislative priorities last legislative session, but it died without escaping the House of Representatives. The governor applauded its passage Wednesday in a news release:

“This revision to existing law closes a dangerous gap that puts lives at risk,” she said. “I commend the House Judiciary Committee for their swift action on this legislation, and I strongly urge both chambers to act with the same sense of urgency this issue demands.”

House Bill 12 amends a 2020 law that created a civil procedure enabling a judge to approve a temporary seizure of a person’s guns based on requests to law enforcement from family members, employers, school officials and others. The 2020 law says gun owners may have up to 48 hours to surrender their weapons after a judge approves an officer’s petition.

The amended version, sponsored by Rep. Christine Chandler (D-Los Alamos) and Joy Garratt (D-Albuquerque), seeks to clarify that if an officer deems a person a risk in the course of their official duties, the officer doesn’t need a request from a third party before seeking a judge’s approval to order a weapons seizure.

The bill also eliminates the 48-hour window and requires a gun owner served with an order to surrender firearms “immediately” to police.

In 2024, according to state court data, judges in 15 counties reviewed 94 petitions to grant year-long seizure orders and approved 74 of them. Eighteen were denied or dismissed, and judges extended two others. Garratt said the denied petitions demonstrate that judges aren’t rubber-stamping police requests to receive weapons.

“They go before a judge,” Garratt said. “They’re not automatically granted.”

The bill passed by a vote of 7-4, along party lines, and now heads to the House Floor.

Republican lawmakers said they were concerned the bill didn’t actually do much, was overly broad or created permanent records of a brief moment of crisis. The bill sponsors countered that the bill simply clarified that officers can bring these petitions themselves, which has caused judges in different judicial districts some confusion.

Opponents in the audience said the bill was too punitive for people who had not been convicted of crimes, but supporters, including members of Moms Demand Action, said acting quickly to remove firearms from volatile situations can save lives.

The 2024 version would have allowed health care professionals to request that a judge consider a temporary gun seizure. It would have also permitted district courts to issue 24/7 search warrants over the phone if a person refused to surrender their guns.