Key points
- Federal law makes it unlawful for anyone convicted in any court of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" to possess a firearm or ammunition in or affecting commerce.[1]
- The statute contains no time limit; it stops applying only through the exceptions written into the statute (a conviction that is expunged, set aside or pardoned, or civil rights that are restored) or under a 5-year rule for a single dating-relationship conviction.[2][3][4]
- A knowing violation is punishable by a fine, up to 15 years in prison, or both under 18 USC 924(a)(8).[5]
- Dating partners were added to the federal definition on June 25, 2022, and that amendment does not apply to convictions entered before that date.[6]
- The conviction does not have to be for an offense labeled "domestic": the relationship need not be an element of the earlier offense.[7]
Under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9), a person "convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" may not possess a firearm or ammunition in or affecting commerce, ship or transport them in interstate or foreign commerce, or receive any that have moved in interstate or foreign commerce.[1] The statute sets no period of years, which is why it is commonly called a lifetime ban, though that phrase is not in the text.[2] More precisely, the ban has no end date unless one of the statute's own exceptions applies: the conviction is expunged, set aside or pardoned, civil rights are restored, or the person qualifies under the 5-year rule for a single conviction involving a dating partner.[3][4]
This page explains what counts as a qualifying conviction, how the Supreme Court has read the definition, the exceptions written into the statute, and the penalty. Michigan's own, shorter ban is covered in Michigan's 8-year firearm ban.
What is a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence"?
The definition is in 18 USC 921(a)(33)(A). The offense must be a misdemeanor under federal, state, tribal, or local law, and it must have, "as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon."[8] It must also have been committed by a person in one of these relationships to the victim:[8]
- A current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.[8]
- A person with whom the victim shares a child in common.[8]
- A person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian.[8]
- A person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.[8]
- A person who has a current or recent former dating relationship with the victim, for convictions entered on or after June 25, 2022.[8][6]
The words "convicted in any court" mean the ban is not limited to federal convictions; a Michigan district court conviction is within the phrase.[1]
How the Supreme Court has read the definition
Three decisions make the definition broader than many people expect.
| Case | Year | What the Court held |
|---|---|---|
| United States v Hayes | 2009 | The domestic relationship must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in the firearms prosecution, but it need not be a defining element of the earlier offense.[7] |
| United States v Castleman | 2014 | Congress incorporated the common-law meaning of "force," namely offensive touching, into the definition.[9] |
| Voisine v United States | 2016 | A reckless domestic assault qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.[10] |
Read together, these cases mean the conviction does not have to carry the word "domestic," does not have to involve an injury, and does not have to rest on intentional conduct.[7][9][10] That matters in plea negotiations: a plea to a general assault charge can still trigger the federal ban if the complaining witness was in a covered relationship, and whether it does is a question of federal law.[7] See plea bargains in domestic violence cases.
When a conviction does not count
Counsel and jury trial
A person is not treated as convicted unless he or she was represented by counsel in the case or knowingly and intelligently waived the right to counsel. Where the person was entitled to a jury trial in the jurisdiction, the case must have been tried by a jury or the person must have knowingly and intelligently waived a jury, "by guilty plea or otherwise."[11]
Expungement, set-aside, pardon, restored civil rights
A person "shall not be considered to have been convicted" if the conviction has been expunged or set aside, or is an offense for which the person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored (if the law of the jurisdiction provides for the loss of civil rights for such an offense), unless the pardon, expungement, or restoration expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.[3]
How the "civil rights restored" language applies to a Michigan misdemeanor is not settled. The Michigan Judicial Institute's benchbook reports two Sixth Circuit decisions on Michigan misdemeanor domestic assault that came out differently: one in 2002 treated the return of civil rights after jail as a restoration, and one in 2012 held that Michigan's 8-year concealed pistol license ineligibility restricted firearm rights enough that the federal ban still applied.[12] Nothing in the sources reviewed for this library supports telling a reader that the federal ban ends automatically in Michigan at any point.[12] The options are set out in can gun rights be restored? and expunging a domestic violence conviction.
Deferred cases
Federal regulations say a person is not considered convicted unless "the person is considered to have been convicted by the jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held." Michigan's deferral statute says a discharge and dismissal under MCL 769.4a is not a conviction for purposes of disqualifications or disabilities imposed by law upon conviction of a crime.[13][14] No primary source reviewed for this library applies the federal rule to a Michigan deferral specifically, including the period while probation is still running, so this page does not state a conclusion.[13] See does a 769.4a deferral count as a conviction?
Dating partners: the 2022 change and the 5-year rule
Before June 25, 2022, a dating partner who was never a spouse, co-parent or cohabitant was outside the federal definition, a gap often called the "boyfriend loophole." The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act added "a person who has a current or recent former dating relationship with the victim," and the amendment does not apply to any conviction entered before the date of enactment.[6]
Federal law defines a dating relationship as one between people "who have or have recently had a continuing serious relationship of a romantic or intimate nature." A casual acquaintanceship or ordinary fraternization in a business or social context is not a dating relationship.[15] Michigan uses its own definition for its own statutes, explained in what counts as a dating relationship in Michigan.
The dating-relationship category is also the only one with a time-limited version of the federal ban. A person with not more than 1 conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence against a person in a dating relationship, who is not otherwise prohibited, is no longer disqualified once 5 years have elapsed from the later of the judgment of conviction or the completion of any custodial or supervisory sentence, provided the person "has not subsequently been convicted of another such offense," of another misdemeanor that has as an element the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, or of any other offense that would disqualify the person under section 922(g).[4] That restoration is not available to a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, a person who shares a child with the victim, a person who lives or lived with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim.[4]
What is the penalty?
"Whoever knowingly violates subsection (d) or (g) of section 922 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or both."[5] The maximum was 10 years under 18 USC 924(a)(2) until June 25, 2022, and some reference works, including parts of the Michigan benchbook, still print the older figure.[5]
In Rehaif v United States, the Supreme Court held that in a prosecution under section 922(g) the government must prove both that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category of barred persons.[16] That case involved a different paragraph of section 922(g), and the benchbook describes its application to paragraph (g)(9) as uncertain.[16]
Possession under federal law is not limited to holding a gun. The Supreme Court has said that section 922(g) prevents a barred person "not only from holding his firearms himself but also from maintaining control over those guns in the hands of others."[17] The same decision recognized that the statute does not stop a barred owner from selling or otherwise disposing of firearms, and that a court may approve a transfer to a third party when it is satisfied the owner will not retain control.[17]
The person who supplies the gun is exposed as well. It is unlawful to sell or otherwise dispose of a firearm or ammunition to a person the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.[18]
How the federal and Michigan bans compare
| Question | Michigan law | Federal law |
|---|---|---|
| Where is it? | MCL 750.224f(5)[19] | 18 USC 922(g)(9)[1] |
| How long? | 8 years after fines, imprisonment and probation are completed[19][20] | No time limit in the text, apart from the 5-year dating-relationship rule[2] |
| Which convictions? | A list of nine Michigan offenses and corresponding laws elsewhere[21][22] | Any misdemeanor with a force element committed in a covered relationship[8] |
| Maximum for a violation | 5 years or a $5,000 fine, or both[23] | 15 years, a fine, or both[5] |
| On-duty exception for police? | None, according to MCOLES[24] | None; 18 USC 925(a)(1) excludes section 922(g)(9)[25] |
The relationship lists are not identical. Michigan's domestic assault statute covers "a resident or former resident of the individual's household," so a Michigan conviction involving a household member such as a roommate is within Michigan's 8-year ban but may not be covered by the federal relationship list.[26] No case applying that comparison was reviewed for this library.[26]
Is there a federal application to get rights back?
On paper, yes. 18 USC 925(c) says a prohibited person may apply to the Attorney General for relief from federal firearm disabilities, which may be granted if the applicant "will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety" and relief "would not be contrary to the public interest."[27] Whether that program is currently operating and accepting applications was not verified for this library, so it should not be relied on as a working remedy without checking.
Related federal bans
Section 922(g) has other paragraphs that come up in domestic cases. One applies while a person is subject to a qualifying protection order, covered in PPOs and firearms.[28] Another applies to anyone convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.[29] Restrictions during an open case are covered in firearms while the case is pending, and the special position of officers and service members in police officers, service members and the firearm ban.
Common questions
Is the federal domestic violence gun ban really for life?
"Lifetime ban" is a fair description of the text, though it is not a phrase the statute uses. 18 USC 922(g)(9) contains no period of years. It stops applying only if the conviction is expunged, set aside or pardoned, if civil rights are restored (where the law of the jurisdiction takes civil rights away for the offense), or under the 5-year rule for a person with a single dating-relationship conviction; and an expungement, pardon or restoration that expressly says the person may not possess firearms does not lift it.[2][3][4]
Does Michigan's 8-year period end the federal ban too?
No. The two laws are separate. Michigan's ban under MCL 750.224f(5) runs for 8 years after the sentence is completed, while the federal statute has no built-in end date.[19][2] A person can be past the Michigan period and still be prohibited under federal law.
The conviction was for plain assault after a plea bargain. Does the federal ban still apply?
It can. In United States v Hayes, the Supreme Court held that a domestic relationship, although it must be established beyond a reasonable doubt in the federal firearms prosecution, need not be a defining element of the earlier offense.[7] So a conviction under a general assault law counts if the victim was in fact in a covered relationship.[7]
What if the person was a boyfriend or girlfriend who never lived with the other person?
Since June 25, 2022, the federal definition includes a person who has "a current or recent former dating relationship with the victim." The amendment does not apply to any conviction entered before June 25, 2022.[6] A person with not more than one such conviction, and not otherwise prohibited, stops being federally disqualified once 5 years have passed from the later of the judgment of conviction or the completion of any custodial or supervisory sentence, if the person has not since been convicted of another such offense, another misdemeanor with a force or deadly-weapon element, or any other offense that would disqualify the person under section 922(g).[4]
Can a police officer or soldier carry a duty weapon despite the ban?
No. The federal exemption for firearms issued for the use of government agencies expressly excludes sections 922(d)(9) and 922(g)(9), so it does not cover a person with a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence conviction.[25]
Sources
- 18 USC 922(g)(9) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 922(g)(9); 18 USC 921(a)(33)(B)(ii), (C) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 921(a)(33)(B)(ii) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 921(a)(33)(C) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 924(a)(8) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 921(a)(33)(A)(ii); Pub. L. 117-159, § 12005(a), (b) (note to 18 USC 921) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- *United States v Hayes*, 555 US 415 (2009) (decided 24 February 2009) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 921(a)(33)(A) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- *United States v Castleman*, 572 US 157 (2014) (decided 26 March 2014) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- *Voisine v United States*, 579 US ___ (2016) (decided 27 June 2016) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 921(a)(33)(B)(i) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- *United States v Wegrzyn*, 305 F3d 593, 595 (CA 6, 2002); *United States v Sanford*, 707 F3d 594, 596–597 (CA 6, 2012); *Logan v United States*, 552 US 23 (2007) — Michigan Judicial Institute, Domestic Violence Benchbook
- 27 CFR 478.11 ("Misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" ¶ (2)(i)); MCL 769.4a(5) — ecfr.gov
- MCL 769.4a(5) — Michigan Legislature
- 18 USC 921(a)(37) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- *Rehaif v United States*, 588 US 225, 227 (2019) — Michigan Judicial Institute, Domestic Violence Benchbook
- *Henderson v United States*, 575 US 622, 626–628, 631 (2015) — Michigan Judicial Institute, Domestic Violence Benchbook
- 18 USC 922(d)(8), (d)(9); 18 USC 924(a)(8) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- MCL 750.224f(5) — Michigan Legislature
- MCL 750.224f(5)(a)–(c) — Michigan Legislature
- MCL 750.224f(10)(c)(i)–(ix) — Michigan Legislature
- MCL 750.224f(10)(c)(x)–(xi) — Michigan Legislature
- MCL 750.224f(6), (7) — Michigan Legislature
- MCOLES Official Correspondence (16 May 2024) — State of Michigan
- 18 USC 925(a)(1) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- MCL 750.81(2); 18 USC 921(a)(33)(A)(ii) — Michigan Legislature
- 18 USC 925(c) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 922(g)(8) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
- 18 USC 922(g)(1); 18 USC 921(a)(20)(B) — Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
This page is general legal information about Michigan law, published by the office of Attorney Shawn Haff. It is not legal advice and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and every case turns on its own facts — check the sources linked above and talk to a licensed Michigan attorney about your situation. If you are in danger, call 911. The National Domestic Violence Hotline is 1-800-799-7233.