Senator Shanika Henson, sponsor of Senate Bill 509, told the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee on Feb. 7 the bill would close “a loophole” in Maryland’s assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) law by prohibiting people under court-ordered AOT from possessing firearms while they are subject to the program. “It is a critical part of the treatment…for suicide prevention,” Henson said, urging a favorable report.

The bill prompted extended questions from committee members about how it would overlap with Maryland’s extreme risk protective order (ERPO) law and how enforcement would work. Henson said the prohibition would be enforced in a manner analogous to ERPOs: the court would issue the order and, if necessary, a sheriff could enforce firearms turnover. She described AOT respondents as a “very narrow classification” — people with serious and persistent mental illness under a court-ordered, structured outpatient plan — and framed the bill primarily as a suicide-prevention measure.

Opponents at the hearing said the bill could have unintended collateral consequences. Crystal Williams of the Office of the Public Defender and Courtney Bergen of Disability Rights Maryland said AOT does not require a finding of dangerousness and that placing all AOT respondents into a firearms-disqualification category may subject people to severe collateral harms. Bergen, who said she has lived experience with the background-check system, described personal consequences after being entered into the federal NICS/NCIC database and said the listing had complicated employment and licensing. “When we pass these laws that have very broad implications without a requirement of a dangerousness finding…, the consequences are huge,” Bergen said.

Members pressed sponsors on scope and evidence. Senator Fulton and others asked whether research supports a categorical prohibition; Henson repeatedly pointed to suicide-prevention data and to testimony from public-health researchers (she referenced analysis by Johns Hopkins in the hearing). Committee members also raised concerns about compliance with federal rules limiting NICS reporting to certain involuntary civil commitments; witnesses noted disability-rights groups’ letters arguing that using NICS for AOT respondents could contravene federal limits and produce discrimination or other harms.

No final action was recorded on SB 509 during the hearing. Committee discussion focused on whether the proposal could be tailored to protect people at genuine risk of harming themselves while avoiding unnecessary entries into background-check systems that produce collateral disadvantages for people with disabilities.

Why it matters: The hearing highlighted a policy tension seen in several states — balancing measures that reduce firearm access among people deemed at elevated suicide risk against procedural protections and federal limits on background-check reporting. SB 509 would directly affect a subset of Marylanders subject to court-ordered AOT and could change interactions among behavioral-health courts, law enforcement, and federal background-check databases.

Sources: Testimony and exchanges at the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee hearing on Feb. 7, 2025; written letters and references cited at the hearing.