SB 1459 - This act establishes the "Anti-Red Flag Gun Seizure Act" which provides that any federal order of protection or other federal judicial or executive order which directs the seizure of a firearm or prohibits the possession of a firearm, except as provided for in the act, shall not be enforced in this state. Additionally, no public agency, political subdivision, or law enforcement agency shall receive any federal funding for the purpose of enforcing any federal acts or judicial orders confiscating any firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition. Any political subdivision or law enforcement officer who violates this act shall be subject to a $50,000 penalty per occurrence. Sovereign immunity shall not be an affirmative defense. This act is identical to HB 1683 (2026), HB 1700 (2026),and to a provision contained in SB 1055 (2026), HB 2176 (2026), and is similar to SB 142 (2025). TRISTAN BENSON, JR.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Adam Schnelting

Missouri bill prohibits enforcement of red flag gun seizure laws, preventing courts from temporarily removing firearms from individuals assessed as dangerous.

Second Read and Referred S Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee

Legislative bill overview

SB 1459 would prohibit Missouri from implementing or enforcing "red flag" laws that allow courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed a danger to themselves or others. The bill essentially prevents the state from adopting extreme risk protection order (ERPO) legislation, which exists in numerous other states.

Why is this important

Red flag laws represent a contested policy approach to preventing gun violence by removing firearms during mental health crises or threat assessments. Missouri's stance on this directly affects public safety strategies and how the state balances Second Amendment protections against intervention in crisis situations. This type of legislation influences national policy debates about preventing mass shootings and suicides.

Potential points of contention

Constitutional interpretation: Supporters argue it protects Second Amendment rights; opponents contend ERPOs include due process protections and don't constitute unconstitutional seizure

Public safety effectiveness: Disagreement over whether red flag laws reduce suicides and mass shootings versus concerns they're ineffective or subject to abuse

Due process standards: Debate over whether existing ERPO procedures in other states provide adequate legal protections or if they enable overreach

Federalism: Questions about whether states should be prohibited from implementing policies their legislatures support