The Maine Gun Safety Coalition announced in January 2025 that they had gathered over 80,000 signatures from Maine citizens in support of the initiative.[1] The signatures were validated in March 2025, and the initiative was certified as having qualified for the ballot in the November 2025 election.[2]
In June, gun owners' rights groups threatened to file a lawsuit against theMaine Legislature if it did not schedule a public hearing on the citizens' proposed ERPO Act, as required by state law.[3] Opposition within the Legislature to holding the hearing was dropped soon after.[4] As the Legislature did not vote to enact the citizens' initiated Act, it will now go to the voters on the November 2025 ballot as Question 2.[5]
Question 2 is a citizen-initiated measure in response to a 2023 mass shooting inLewiston that killed 18.[6] The shooter's family had previously expressed concern about his mental wellbeing and unsuccessfully urgedlaw enforcement to confiscate his guns , though the 'yellow flag' law in effect at the time required that police officers take the gun owner into custody, then submit him to a mental health evaluation by medical personnel, before they could go to court for a temporary order to remove his guns, none of which occurred.[7][8]
Unlike Maine's yellow flag law, Question 2 does not require the homicidal or suicidal individual to be taken into custody first and subjected to mental health evaluation before obtaining the temporary gun removal order.[9][9] Thus, if Question 2 passes, law enforcement will have the ability to obtain a court order to remove the individual's guns when they are away from their home or car, without having to find and detain them.[9]
Maine currently has yellow flag laws, a lesser version ofred flag laws. In Maine, only law enforcement officers can confiscate firearms, while a judge requires a mental health evaluation to do the same.[10]
Do you want to allow courts to temporarily prohibit a person from having dangerous weapons if law enforcement, family, or household members show that the person poses a significant danger of causing physical injury to themselves or others?[11]
The initiative would allow judges to more easily issue extreme risk protection orders, permitting them to authorize confiscation of firearms if an individual is deemed a threat by a judge based on evidence presented by law enforcement or family members.[12] It would also prohibit the individual from purchasing a firearm for one year, unless the respondent files a successful motion to terminate the extreme risk protection order early.[13]
The confiscation/prohibition process begins with a family member or a law enforcement officer filing an affidavit attesting to the threat the individual poses. A judge may hold a hearing, at which the individual may argue in their defense, within fourteen days of the affidavit's filing, or choose to use a "emergency clause" to confiscate the individual's firearms immediately, with a hearing scheduled within fourteen days.[13] A confiscation may last for up to a year.[13]
