WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2193

Creates extreme risk orders of protection

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Steve Butz

Missouri HB 2193 authorizes courts to issue temporary and longer-term extreme risk protection orders to restrict firearm access for individuals deemed an imminent danger, with due

Referred: Emerging Issues(H)
#courts #domesticrelations #familylaw #firearms
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2193

Overview

HB 2193 (Missouri, 2026) creates extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs). The bill authorizes courts to issue temporary and longer-term orders restricting firearm access and related protections for individuals deemed to pose an imminent risk to themselves or others. The measure adds procedural steps for petitioning, due process protections for respondents, and a framework for enforcement and duration of the orders.

Purpose and intent

  • Provide a mechanism to intervene when a person is believed to pose an imminent danger due to threatening behavior, a recent act of violence, or other risk indicators.
  • Allow family members, household members, law enforcement, or certain other parties to petition a court for protection to prevent firearm access and potential harm.
  • Aim to prevent gun violence and related injuries by curtailing access to firearms during high-risk periods.

Key provisions and changes

  • Authorization of ERPOs: Courts may issue extreme risk protection orders against individuals who are considered to pose an imminent risk.
  • Petition and parties: The bill outlines who may file a petition (e.g., household members, family members, law enforcement, or other specified petitioners) and the required information to substantiate the risk.
  • Temporary orders: Provisions for temporary ERPOs (often ex parte or with limited notice) to take immediate action to remove or prohibit possession of firearms.
  • Duration and renewal: ERPOs have a defined initial duration, with intervals for court review and potential renewal if risk persists.
  • Firearm prohibition and surrender: Provisions requiring the respondent to surrender or temporarily disable firearms and to avoid purchasing new firearms while the order is in effect.
  • Notification and service: Requirements to notify the respondent and to ensure proper service of the petition and the order.
  • Due process protections: Notice, hearing rights, opportunity to present evidence, and other procedural safeguards for respondents.
  • Enforcement and penalties: Mechanisms for enforcing the ERPO, including penalties for violations (e.g., possessing firearms while subject to an ERPO).
  • Relisting and modification: Procedures to modify, extend, or terminate ERPOs based on changing circumstances.
  • Records and reporting: Potential measures related to the maintenance of ERPO records and reporting to authorities.

Who would be affected

  • Respondents: Individuals subject to an ERPO would face firearm restrictions, potential surrender of weapons, and related temporary or longer-term limitations.
  • Petitioners: Family or household members, law enforcement, or other authorized petitioners who seek ERPOs to protect themselves or others.
  • Law enforcement: Agencies responsible for enforcing ERPOs, retrieving firearms, and ensuring compliance.
  • Public safety: The broader community could be affected through reduced risk of firearm-related harm during active ERPO periods.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Referral and consideration: The bill specifies the process for filing petitions, service, and hearings.
  • Hearing timeline: Timelines for initial hearings on temporary orders and for subsequent full hearings to determine longer-term ERPO status.
  • Renewal cycles: Procedures and intervals for reviewing and renewing orders if risk continues.
  • Effective dates: Prefiled in 2025, introduced in 2026, with initial actions including committee referral and readings in early 2026, suggesting a multi-stage legislative process.

Potential impact and considerations

  • Public safety: If implemented, the bill could reduce incidents of gun violence and self-harm during high-risk periods.
  • Civil liberties: The ERPO framework necessitates clear due process protections to balance safety with individual rights.
  • Administrative burden: Law enforcement and courts would need to manage filings, service, weapon surrender processes, and record-keeping.
  • Geographic and jurisdictional scope: Details likely align with Missouri’s state court system and law enforcement authorities; local implementation may depend on state and local practices.

If you’d like, I can tailor this summary to include specific sections of the bill text (definitions, petition forms, or duration tables) once the official bill language is available.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.