- Michiganders filed over 500 extreme risk protection orders in 2025, with 407 of those orders eventually granted; 19 were later dismissed
- Some data, however, remains unclear, such as the race and gender of those seeing their guns confiscated
- The law, signed in 2023, seeks to temporarily remove firearms from people believed of being at risk of hurting themselves or others
LANSING — Use of Michigan’s “red flag” gun law jumped 31% from 2024 to 2025, according to a report released this week, prompting cautious optimism from supporters but hardly quelling debate about the policy.
Police and individuals sought 514 risk protection orders in 2025, 407 of which were granted, according to the report from the State Court Administrative Office.
The law took effect in 2024 and allows judges to temporarily remove guns for up to a year from those deemed at risk of hurting themselves or others. In 2024, 391 orders were requested — 384 against adults, seven against minors — 287 of which were granted.
In 2025, 93 orders were dismissed or denied and 19 orders were later dismissed after being granted – meaning guns were taken but returned before the one-year mark.
While the overall number of gun owners in Michigan is difficult to track, state data indicates about 845,000 Michiganders have a concealed pistol license as of March 1. About 1 in 3 Michigan adults have a firearm at home.
The law “is working as it should,” said April Zeoli, director of the University of Michigan’s Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention, who added the orders are “not just for crime” but “also for suicide risk.”
Opponents, including Republicans who wanted to repeal the law last December, question its constitutionality. Twenty-two states and Washington, DC, have similar laws.
Two GOP candidates for governor — Senate Minority Leader Aric Nesbitt, R-Porter Township, and former Michigan House Speaker Tom Leonard — say they’ll work to repeal the law if elected in November.
“Criminals don’t follow gun laws,” Leonard said in a March 3 statement. “They don’t apply for permits. They don’t comply with restrictions. And the more we restrict the constitutional freedoms of law-abiding citizens, the more we empower the very criminals we’re supposed to be stopping.”
Of the 407 orders granted in 2025:
- Firearms were removed from an individual before being granted a hearing in 254 instances, or roughly 62% of the time
- Law enforcement specifically requested 118 risk protection orders, which resulted in the immediate removal of guns
- 35 requests did not require guns be removed from a person before a hearing
Ryan Bates, executive director of the nonprofit coalition End Gun Violence Michigan, praised the law, but said he’s disappointed the report doesn’t break down demographic details.
“It would be really helpful to know where this is happening, and that would give government and advocates greater clarity about where we need to go and work on improving the system,” he said.
While a person can list their race, age and gender – as well as the race, age and gender of the person they’re making a report against – it is not mandatory.
Among known demographics, the majority were filed against white people (184 to 97 for Black people) and men (264 to 55 for women.)
Better data could ensure the law isn’t “used in a racially biased manner,” said Zeoli of UM.
The Democratic-led Legislature passed the red flag law 2023 alongside bills mandating the safe storage of firearms and universal background checks for all firearms sold in Michigan, though did not officially take effect until February 2024.
The law specifies who can petition the court for a confiscation order: Someone with either a personal familial or romantic relationship with the gun owner, a roommate or a mandatory reporter, such as a police officer or health care provider.
If granted, the orders last one year, but a person can contest an order once every six months the order is in effect, should they feel it was improperly granted. A judge could also be compelled to either extend, or preemptively end, an order at any point if asked by the initial petitioner.
