WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1653

Repeal of involuntary firearm removal process.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Zach Payne and 1 co-sponsor

HB 1653 would eliminate Indiana's extreme risk protection order law, removing courts' authority to temporarily confiscate firearms from individuals posing documented danger to self or others.

Representative Sweet added as coauthor
#agencies;departmentofcorrections(doc) #agencies;departmentofeducation(doe)andsecretaryofeducation #agencies;indianastatepolice(isp) #corrections;adultinmatesandfacilities #courts;generally #courts;juvenilecourts #courts;trialcourts #criminallawandprocedure;generally #criminallawandprocedure;offensesagainstpersons #criminallawandprocedure;sentencing #firearmsandweapons #localgovernment;generally #publicrecords #schools;fundsandbudgets
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1653

Legislative bill overview

HB 1653 proposes to repeal Indiana's involuntary firearm removal process, commonly known as "red flag" or extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws. This would eliminate the legal mechanism that currently allows law enforcement, family members, or healthcare providers to petition courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed to pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others.

Why is this important

Red flag laws represent a contested policy approach to suicide and gun violence prevention. Repealing Indiana's law would remove a tool intended to prevent tragedies during mental health crises, while supporters of repeal argue it raises due process concerns and Second Amendment protections. The bill reflects broader national divisions over balancing public safety measures with individual rights.

Potential points of contention

  • Due process concerns: Supporters of repeal argue ERPOs may restrict gun rights without sufficient procedural safeguards, while opponents contend existing Indiana law includes judicial review and notice requirements that protect due process
  • Effectiveness debate: Disagreement over whether red flag laws meaningfully reduce suicides and homicides, with limited empirical data, versus anecdotal evidence of cases where removal prevented tragedy
  • Second Amendment interpretation: Fundamental disagreement about whether temporary firearm removal constitutes unconstitutional infringement versus a reasonable public safety regulation within existing constitutional frameworks

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

Sign in to ask a question.