[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6279642,"mediaKeyId","2621762-f55575863678354a4ee58c33b5779c11","parentId",2621762,"title","Committee holds first hearing on bill to allow temporary firearm removal for people judged at extreme risk","audioSeconds",5725,"startMs",2258000,"endMs",7983000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2621762-f55575863678354a4ee58c33b5779c11&start=2258&end=7983","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2621762-f55575863678354a4ee58c33b5779c11/thumbnail_2258000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6279642/Alaska/Committee-holds-first-hearing-on-bill-to-allow-temporary-firearm-removal-for-people-judged-at-extreme-risk","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6279642-35c14faea607431c80fcd7cb1de92c86/orig.mp4?Expires=1770667888&Signature=Ezia-BRTUdHma92A35AQ1zbLr1pxGElIintxeZxV3UVcYaklMdxVS8pMrk2~2TJJpFt-FV1wi2UDlAtnVYqLyoINqW23-sAzirYb~RtfyXTqIUiVvvLbYN~wBZYj3L5AUiRDRwayGepWegj6z2jbGfW0P9-du2Qs~mRUeTgACkvLX8298nrThJvqiS3uvRyedSMOdjeaHBPxit~iG5UWk29QcRm1toE5aX0KNw~023dCnYbSQeHigB7Glj0Fd3iEbNWWHlvomFHxLbeQsDfyJcQHxuBb~3gOOHUEFHZkMXywXm6APuA3MJ0dprqpwSCMfuSi7lkak~Hnxs96sVmzEA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Alaska Legislature","date","2025-03-13T00:00:00Z","article","The House State Affairs Committee held a first hearing March 13 on House Bill 89, which would create civil gun-violence protection orders authorizing a judge to temporarily restrict a person’s access to firearms and ammunition when the petitioner shows evidence that the person poses a significant risk to themselves or others.

Sponsor Representative Andy Josephson framed the measure as a public-health tool aimed at preventing firearm suicides and homicides. \"This bill is not just about, our tragic problem with suicide, however. It's about, homicide deaths as well,\" Josephson said as he outlined three types of orders in the draft statute: emergency three-day orders signed by police, short-term ex parte orders (up to 20 days) and standard orders lasting up to six months.

The bill’s procedures and constitutional questions drew sustained attention. Josephson cited recent court decisions and a U.S. Supreme Court opinion he said supports temporary disarmament when a court finds a credible threat. He also pointed to published state-court rulings in Indiana, California, Connecticut, Florida and New York as precedent for similar laws.

Proponents and invited testimony

Several invited witnesses and a long list of public testifiers supported the bill as a targeted, temporary intervention to prevent suicide and mass violence. Jake Chandler, an investigator with a county district attorney's office in Oregon who has worked with Oregon extreme-risk orders, said his office \"only apply for IRPO's on people that we believe were at risk for suicide or homicide and that they would attempt to carry out their plans if we did not intervene.\" Chandler described training for law enforcement and community partners and gave examples where an order was followed by engagement and apparent de-escalation.

Christopher Kurita, a threat-assessment investigator in Fort Lauderdale, described family-level crises in which no criminal charge was available and said law enforcement requests for risk-protection orders are made \"under oath presenting evidence ... of the person's dangerousness,\" adding, \"we don't take it lightly.\"

Public supporters — including veterans, school staff, counselors and family members of shooting victims — described instances they said illustrate gaps in the current law. Claire Ross, who said her son survived a neighbor’s shooting, asked lawmakers: \"If your child is suicidal, wouldn't you want some support to remove the guns from their house until they were in a better state of mind?\"

Opposition and constitutional concerns

Eileen Klein, state director for the NRA, told the committee the organization \"strongly oppose[s] House Bill 89,\" arguing the measure risks due-process and Fourth and First Amendment violations and that it removes firearms without a criminal conviction or mental-health adjudication. Testifiers opposing the bill cited cases in other states where they said red-flag orders were used improperly, raised concerns about ex parte orders and warned the measure could be misused in domestic disputes.

Legal and procedural issues raised

Committee members and witnesses debated standard-of-proof questions and notice requirements. Josephson and witnesses described the bill’s layered safeguards: a six-month order requires notice and a finding by clear and convincing evidence; an ex parte short-term order requires heightened factual showing because the respondent may lack notice; emergency orders can be issued by police for immediate threats and last three days. The bill text also includes surrender and disposition timelines: in the sponsor's presentation the court would give respondents 24 hours to surrender or sell firearms and 48 hours for an officer to file a receipt documenting disposition.

Speakers discussed Alaska’s current law that allows firearm removal as part of domestic-violence protection orders (DVPOs) and noted that HB 89 would extend a similar remedy beyond household relationships to non-family situations where a petitioner shows a substantial risk.

Next steps

The committee heard extended public testimony and did not take a final vote. Members indicated they will continue the dialogue and expect follow-up hearings to examine constitutional, procedural and implementation issues, and to invite stakeholders back for detailed questioning.

Ending

Public testimony was left open for future hearings; the committee adjourned after hearing invited and public testimony, with members asking the sponsor and stakeholders to supply additional legal analysis and implementation detail for later consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","03/13/2025 03:15 PM House STATE AFFAIRS","oneSentenceSummary","The House State Affairs Committee held a first hearing March 13 on House Bill 89, which would create civil gun-violence protection orders allowing a judge to temporarily restrict a person’s access to firearms when petitioners show evidence of significant risk.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature Alaska, Alaska","taxId",78559,"location","Alaska","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6279647,"Committee hears introductory testimony on DUI diversion bill to defer conviction for eligible first-time offenders",1758,477000,2235000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2621762-f55575863678354a4ee58c33b5779c11&start=477&end=2235","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2621762-f55575863678354a4ee58c33b5779c11/thumbnail_477000.jpg","/articles/6279647/Alaska/Committee-hears-introductory-testimony-on-DUI-diversion-bill-to-defer-conviction-for-eligible-first-time-offenders","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6279647-21531e2bcc836c2cb36fc98be024922d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770667888&Signature=KtN82BmtTcPYhS~nKUipXo0yaDLHJPPjNauyw09q9LlavOfVWQkMvBtJWoss7qXLLixAbMFPHA0viv3PqpjM~IGAFzkE6BF7zkS06EhoeAI1giGQcH6iuclmXfYxeKC1kD7qlF8FMLt6YtzfFKZdg2etFqNZTUszSgPXnq0zrA1L8CQ9xbF1eStc8BpRPTr6grSJLPsuijkMWLjYOG1kCs7SRpJDEnpTeUX1BGVKAS2nz0uYZfsu0b2QZz5ustJL-P7rOjclQFuUxpVnrkCVR4k0ySD52Cqxn0Lm6ex8sKKzGzgTTnd4s0aDtCnN5CqCjj4psuDwbbdSw-d58Wkm2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House State Affairs Committee on March 13 took introductory testimony on House Bill 2, a bill that would allow courts to defer entering a conviction for certain first-time driving-under-the-influence cases if defendants complete a court-ordered diversion program.

Supporters, including the bill sponsor and an Alaska defense attorney who requested the measure, said the program is intended to reduce the collateral harms of a DUI record — higher insurance costs, job loss and long-term family and financial consequences — while preserving accountability through program requirements.

\"Alaska's DUI laws provide effective sticks that discourage people from driving while intoxicated,\" said Bill Satterberg, an attorney who testified in support. \"On the other hand, the automatic application of these sticks creates hardships such as significantly higher insurance rates, loss of employment or unemployability, and family strife.\" Satterberg described a diversion model used in other states and said those programs can reduce repeat offenses.

Nancy Mead, general counsel for the Alaska Court System, provided state data and procedural context. \"About 1,563\" were first-time DUI cases in the last full year for which she had data, Mead said, \"and seconds, there were about 300,\" adding that roughly 20 percent of convicted DUI offenders reoffend.

What the bill would do

Under the bill as presented, an eligible defendant would plead guilty and elect to enter a court-supervised diversion program; if the defendant completes the program and complies with terms and conditions, the original judgment would be deferred or set aside and the charge dismissed. Supporters said successful participants would avoid the statutory first-offense penalties they otherwise face, including the mandatory 72-hour jail term, a $1,500 fine, an SR-22 insurance requirement and possible license suspension for months.

Sponsor Mike Prox said the program would be limited to first-time DUI convictions or refusals absent other serious charges, and that the incentive to accept diversion would decline if the participant reoffends during a 15-year window.

Court concerns and open questions

Mead told the committee the court system needs more clarity in the bill’s procedures before the court can estimate workload changes. \"There are several concerns with the bill as drafted that also lead me to say this will increase the court's workload,\" she said, noting the statute does not yet define the program’s administrative steps, hearing schedule or the litigation that may arise over eligibility.

Mead compared HB 2 to existing procedures such as a suspended entry of judgment used in other offense types and to local municipal practices. She said that where the bill differs from a straightforward suspended entry is that HB 2 describes a program, and that program may require additional hearings and filings. The bill includes a filing fee of $490 for the program petition; Mead said judges could waive the fee for indigent defendants but that the fee and the requirement that some costs be borne by participants are items to be examined.

Committee members pressed for data on case flow. Supporters said the measure could reduce court and prosecutor caseloads by diverting cases early; critics including Mead said uncertainty about program details could create additional hearings and appeals and therefore increase short-term workload even if long-term caseloads fall.

Next steps

The committee set House Bill 2 aside for a future hearing to allow sponsor and stakeholders to work on details the court raised, including clearer procedural language and definitions of program steps, filing and fee handling, and eligibility rules. No formal vote was taken.

Ending

Committee members said they expect to revisit HB 2 with proposed clarifications to the statute before considering formal action.","The House State Affairs Committee on March 13 took introductory testimony on House Bill 2, a bill that would allow courts to defer entering a conviction for certain first-time driving-under-the-influence cases if defendants complete a court-ordered diversion program.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee holds first hearing on bill to allow temporary firearm removal for people judged at extreme risk

Committee hears introductory testimony on DUI diversion bill to defer conviction for eligible first-time offenders