Trump DOJ quietly restores felons' gun rights, AZ lawmaker included

• As many as 1 million convicted felons could apply to the Justice Department to for restoration of their gun rights.
• The program would disqualify people convicted of violent felonies and domestic violence.
• Gun control organizations oppose the move.

The Trump administration quietly restored the gun rights to 22 people who had lost them because of felonies, indictments or other convictions this year as it prepares to revive a long-dormant program that's expected to draw a tsunami of applications.

Department of Justice officials listed the names of nearly two dozen people in late February in the Federal Register. Their crimes ranged from nonviolent drug offenses to bribery and fraud. It includes many who have previously applied for pardons or commutations − but also those who have recently sued the department.

In one notable case, the Justice Department restored the rights of Jake Hoffman, an Arizona state senator charged in the state’s fake elector scheme to keep Trump in the White House in 2020. Trump already pardoned Hoffman for any federal charges, but since he's facing a state indictment in Arizona, he's federally prohibited from buying new firearms. Hoffman declined to comment when reached by USA TODAY.

Federal law generally prohibits felons from possessing guns. It also blocks gun sales to those convicted of misdeamenor domestic violence. Now, the Trump administration is ramping up a relief procedure that's been dormant since 1992 to make it easier for nonviolent felons to get their gun rights back. Gun groups are eager for that program to start, said Adam Kraut, executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation.

“There are millions of people who have been disenfranchised from nonviolent offenses from many years past,” Kraut said. “We’ve supported a series of cases that showed a lifetime ban was unconstitutional.”

The slow drip restoring gun rights is a preview of what the department says could be as many as 1 million annual applications under a new protocol proposed last summer. Last February, Trump signed an executive order aimed at expanding gun rights and in July the Justice Department proposed a process for felons and other prohibited purchasers to petition for their rights back.

The move is supported by gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association and the National Association of Gun Rights. It’s decried by gun violence prevention groups like Everytown and the Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy.

“Who are these people, and why are their rights to purchase deadly weapons being restored? The Trump administration once again believes itself above the law and is sloppily restoring gun rights to people without finishing the rule making process,” said Kris Brown, president of Brady, a gun control group. “That means the public’s comments about what this new restoration process will entail − meaning its potential to arm domestic abusers and hurt communities − are being blatantly ignored.”

Comments largely in favor of proposal

DOJ staffers are still wading through more than 3,400 comments received on the proposal to more widely restore gun rights with more staff and an online portal. It plans to unveil the final rule soon but declined to answer questions about it.

Last summer the department outlined a plan to allocate as many as 50 full-time employees to review the tidal wave of applications that would cost filers $20 each.

The department said it needs a more robust system after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision which has led to more challenges to laws that prohibit felons from owning guns. The landmark 2022 case ruled the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry a loaded handgun in public and opened the door to challenges to laws prohibiting certain firearms, bans for individuals and restrictions on gun possession in sensitive locations.

The proposed rule outlines several “presumptively disqualifying crimes” including felony sex offenses and other violent crimes. It proposed a waiting period of 10 years after completing a sentence for serious offenses and a 5-year period for all other offenses.

A USA TODAY analysis of the 3,400 comments showed roughly 90% were in favor of the proposal. Some comments argued for fewer restrictions, no waiting periods and sought an appeals process.

A minority of comments including some by survivors of violence, opposed the restorations outright.

“Having been the victim of domestic violence, I am deeply concerned about perpetrators of abuse regaining gun ownership rights,” one woman wrote. “Women will lose their lives if this is allowed to go through. Their blood will be on your hands.”

Lawsuits help felons get their guns back

A majority of the 22 individuals named in February by the attorney general had their rights restored after applying for full pardons at the department.

Those pardon applications are still pending for 14 people who now can possess firearms. One man, James Michael Klos, was granted a pardon by President Trump for his 2005 possession of an unregistered firearm charge.

Another route to a faster restoration of rights appears to be lawsuits. That’s the path taken by at least two people on the list released in February.

Philadelphia real estate developer George Manosis, 63, sued DOJ and ATF in 2023 seeking his gun rights. He was convicted in 2005 for bribery, in what his attorney called a “low-level pay to play scheme” involving local building inspectors.

After Trump’s executive order, a DOJ staffer reached out to inform Manosis about the restoration process.

Manosis formerly carried a .380 Colt Mustang he plans to replace with a modern version. He said he’s taken responsibility for his crime and as a landlord he gives people with convictions a second chance.

“As a real estate developer, I go into some dangerous areas of Philadelphia to make them better, so I’d like to have protection with me,” Manosis said, adding he had no connection to the Trump administration.

John Mastrangelo, 45, of Parkland, Florida, received his gun rights back in February. He sued DOJ in 2024 and was also invited to apply for the restoration process.

Mastrangelo was convicted in 2001 of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute narcotics and was sentenced to 47 months in prison.

“He’s the perfect candidate who came back and built a business and shouldn’t be permanently barred from firearms,” said Pat Wilson, an attorney who represented Mastrangelo. “He was very into hunting before he was disarmed, which was the primary motivating factor.”

Nick Sabatine, 74, is an attorney in Wind Gap, Pennsylvania, who had his firearm rights restored. He was charged in 2013 with tax fraud for filing an incorrect return tied to a Ponzi scheme operated by another man.

Sabatine kept his law license after the charge and cooperated with federal authorities on the case. He said he petitioned for his restoration in order to take back possession of firearms he surrendered in 2014.

“It was unfortunate. I made a mistake. I regret it; it was my fault. But this is for people who don’t pose a threat to society and I never saw it as a valid punishment,” Sabatine said, adding that he’d like to protect his two Schnauzers from a black bear that roams his yard.

Sabatine said he had no tie to the Trump administration, but ran for Congress on the Reform Party ticket in 1996. He performs in a conservative rock band “The Patriot All-Stars” and performs a song, “Don’t Blame Me (I Voted for Trump).

Gibson an outlier, pardon attorney still fighting

The issue became a flashpoint early in the Trump administration when Academy Award-winning director and actor Mel Gibson and nine others had their gun rights restored in April 2025.

Justice Department pardon attorney Liz Oyer refused to add Gibson to the pilot program since Gibson had a 2011 domestic violence conviction − which was unlike the other nonviolent offenses reviewed in the FBI background process.

In January 2025, Trump named Gibson a “special ambassador” to Hollywood alongside fellow conservative actors Jon Voight and Sylvester Stallone.

Oyer was fired March 7 and met by security guards with a firing memo signed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. She was given no official reason for her termination and has filed an appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Meanwhile, Oyer is seeking documentation surrounding her firing in a Freedom of Information Act suit. So far, it has not revealed any documentation by Blanche or others before the firing.

Oyer’s attorneys have argued it’s implausible Blanche ordered her firing with no written documentation. The FOIA litigation is ongoing, but has produced internal chats between pardon attorneys about Gibson.

“He is the profile of exactly who I would not recommend for this type of relief,” Oyer chatted to her deputy Kira Gillespie.

“Very very much agree. I wouldn’t say no to people with [domestic violence] history, but I would think extraordinarily few,” Gillespie responded, according to transcripts released in the FOIA suit.

Contributing: John Heasly