US Codex
Bill
Notes

Title V — Restoration

S. 2872 · 113th Congress · Sep 18, 2014 · Lineage

V Restoration

Sec. 501 Federal agency relief program

Section 101(c)(2)(A) of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended—
(1)
by redesignating clauses (ii) and (iii) as clauses (iii) and (iv), respectively; and
(2)
by inserting after clause (i) the following:

“(ii) Adjudication of applications—A Federal department or agency that makes an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or imposes a commitment of a person to a mental institution, as described in subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, shall grant the person relief from the disability imposed by such subsection only if—

“(I) not earlier than 1 year after the date on which the person is first subject to the disability, the person submits to the department or agency—

“(aa) an application for relief from the disability; and

“(bb) the opinion (and records and information supporting the opinion) of a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist who has personally evaluated the person, which attests that—

“(AA) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in the adjudication of the person as a mental defective or involuntary commitment of the person;

“(BB) the person appears to have adhered consistently to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(CC) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others;

“(II) the department or agency has the opportunity to request an additional evaluation of the person by a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist appointed by the department or agency; and

“(III) the department or agency determines by a preponderance of the evidence received that—

“(aa) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in that person’s adjudication as a mental defective or involuntary commitment or that otherwise significantly elevate the risk of harm to self or others;

“(bb) the person—

“(AA) appears to have consistently adhered to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(BB) has expressed a willingness to continue treatment under an appropriate mental health professional;

“(cc) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others; and

“(dd) the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest.”

Sec. 502 State relief programs

(a)
In general— Section 105 of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) is amended—
(1)
in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:

“(2) provides that, not earlier than 1 year after the date on which a person is first adjudicated or committed as described in subsection (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, a State court, board, commission, or other lawful authority shall grant the relief, pursuant to State law and in accordance with the principles of due process, only if—

“(A) the person submits with the application for relief under paragraph (1) the opinion (and records and information supporting the opinion) of a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist who has personally evaluated the person, which attests that—

“(i) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in the adjudication of the person as a mental defective or involuntary commitment of the person;

“(ii) the person appears to have adhered consistently to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(iii) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others;

“(B) the State has the opportunity to request an additional evaluation of the person by a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist appointed by the court, board, commission, or other lawful authority; and

“(C) the court, board, commission, or other lawful authority determines by a preponderance of the evidence received that—

“(i) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in the adjudication of the person as a mental defective or involuntary commitment of the person;

“(ii) the person—

“(I) appears to have consistently adhered to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(II) has expressed a willingness to continue treatment under an appropriate mental health professional;

“(iii) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others; and

“(iv) the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest; and”

(2)
by adding at the end the following:

“(c) Definitions—The Attorney General may, by regulation, define a term used in this section to ensure conformity with Federal programs providing relief from disabilities imposed under subsections (d) and (g) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code.”

(b)
Transition rule— The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply only beginning on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act, in the case of any State that has a program described in section 105 of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (18 U.S.C. 922 note) in effect on the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 503 General Federal relief

Section 925(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended—
(1)
by striking “(c) A person” and inserting “(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a person”; and
(2)
by adding at the end the following:

“(2) A person who is subject to a disability imposed under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 may not receive relief under this subsection unless—

“(A) the person submits an application to the Attorney General for relief from the disability not earlier than 1 year after the date on which the person is first subject to the disability;

“(B) the person submits, with the application for relief, the opinion (and records and information supporting the opinion) of a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist who has personally evaluated the person, which attests that—

“(i) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in the adjudication of the person as a mental defective or involuntary commitment of the person;

“(ii) the person appears to have adhered consistently to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(iii) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others;

“(C) the Attorney General has the opportunity to request an additional evaluation by a psychiatrist or licensed clinical psychologist appointed by the court; and

“(D) the Attorney General determines by a preponderance of the evidence received that—

“(i) the person no longer manifests the symptoms of mental disorder that resulted in the adjudication of the person as a mental defective or involuntary commitment of the person;

“(ii) the person—

“(I) appears to have adhered consistently to any prescribed treatment for a substantial period of time preceding the date of the application; and

“(II) has expressed a willingness to continue treatment under an appropriate mental health professional;

“(iii) if ongoing treatment is required, adherence to that treatment is likely to minimize the risk that the person will revert to a mental state that would present a danger to the person or to others; and

“(iv) the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest.”