Disparities in court orders to relinquish firearms in civil domestic violence protection orders

Research summary

To address firearm-related harms in the context of domestic violence (DV), federal law prohibits firearm purchase or possession for respondents in qualifying civil domestic violence protection order (DVPO) cases. Washington state further authorizes courts to order a DVPO respondent (i.e., the person who perpetrated DV) to relinquish firearms in their possession while a DVPO is in effect. Despite statutory guidelines about when to order firearm relinquishment, judicial biases or other structural factors may influence which DVPO cases include firearm relinquishment. Historically, U.S. laws and institutions have privileged White men with firearm access over minoritized individuals, but little is known about whether racial disparities exist in DVPO firearm relinquishment orders. We investigated racialized disparities in DVPO firearm relinquishment orders using a sample of 6290 granted DVPO cases from King County, Washington (2014–2020). Using logistic regression analyses, we found that White respondents had 30–50% times lower odds of being ordered to relinquish firearms compared with respondents who were Black (aOR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.9) or Latine (aOR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.4, 0.7). Disparities were attenuated in situations when it was statutorily mandatory for the DVPO to include a firearm relinquishment order, compared with situations when the order was discretionary, although disparities remained.

Policy implications

Courts may privilege and protect firearm rights for White DVPO respondents compared with respondents who were Black or Latine. Considering that people who perpetrate DV pose a substantial risk for enacting violence in the home and in the community, DVPO firearm relinquishment should be ordered equitably and thoroughly, regardless of respondent race or ethnicity. Removing judicial discretion may improve the rate at which firearm relinquishment is ordered and mitigate disparities in firearm relinquishment based on respondent race or ethnicity, however, statutory mandates alone are not sufficient to address these problems.