Nearly three in every four red flag law requests in Michigan over the last year resulted in the confiscation of guns from an individual believed to be a threat to himself or others, new state data shows.
Judges across Michigan granted 287 of the 391 requests for a seizure of weapons during the first full year of implementation of the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act, a red flag law that was passed in the wake of the fatal Feb. 13, 2023, shooting at Michigan State University.
New state data on how often the law has been utilized in its first year was was made public Wednesday by the State Court Administrative Office.
The law allows individuals — mostly family members or police — to petition a judge to order the removal of firearms from an individual deemed to be a risk to themselves or others, while also allowing for later appeals of the order.
State Rep. Kelly Breen, a Novi Democrat instrumental in the law’s passage, said she was pleased with the tool’s usage so far and expects numbers to pickup as public awareness of the option increases. Preliminary reviews of the use of the law showed due process was being followed, Breen said, and that the orders had not resulted in drawn out legal battles or dangerous standoffs with police.
“It was my understanding that most people who had an ERPO taken out against them, we saw what we’ve seen in other states, in that they haven’t even tried to get their firearms back,” Breen said. “Many of the cases involved someone who was suicidal.”
The law passed largely along party lines in the Democratic-controlled House and Senate in 2023. Republicans argued the statute violated the Second Amendment and due process rights of gun owners who could be subjected to an unfair order without a hearing by an ex-partner seeking revenge or an individual uncomfortable with guns in general.
Under the 2023 law creating the act, the State Court Administrative Office is tasked with collecting data on the law’s usage and reporting back to lawmakers once a year with that information. Wednesday marked the court’s first report on the law.
Of the 391 orders requested, 287 were granted by judges and 84 were denied. Another six were dismissed or denied by the filer, eight were initially issued but rescinded after a hearing and six were still pending at the time the data was compiled.
Of the 391 requests, 355 were requested ex parte or emergency ex parte, meaning the petitioner asked the judge to issue an order without holding a hearing where the individual at issue in the order could respond to the request.
“But not all of these were disposed ex parte,” the report said. “In several instances, judges held a hearing before making a decision. Of the 338 complaints disposed ex parte, a total of 273 orders were issued and 65 were denied.”
The report also noted that at least 31 individuals, or about 11.4% of those restrained by an order, were charged within 30 days with a total of 74 criminal offenses. Twenty-two charges were related to firearms and ammunitions, but the most frequent charged offenses were for domestic violence and assaulting or resisting a police officer, according to the report.
Of the 74 charges, 28 resulted in convictions or pleas, 14 were dismissed, four resulted in a competency evaluation and 28 are still pending, according to the report.
No petitioners were charged with filing false information and no respondents were charged with refusing or failing to comply with an extreme risk protection order.
The report had incomplete data on the race, gender and age of those who filed petitions or were subject to them.
The report also did not include information on the number of orders being requested by law enforcement versus civilians. But a Detroit News review last year of preliminary ERPO data found police had initiated almost all of the 156 requests made through June 15.
___
© 2025 The Detroit News
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
