Sen. Collins proposes military crisis intervention reform in response to Lewiston shooting

Bill co-sponsored by fellow Maine U.S. Sen. Angus King is called the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act.

Updated: 5:16 PM EDT Sep 16, 2024

HELLO AND WELCOME TO áTOTAL MAINEá ON THIS SEPTEMBER SUNDAY. I’M TERRY STACKHOUSE. TODAY WE’RE SPEAKING WITH SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS. SHE PLANS TO INTRODUCE A BILL FROM CAPITOL HILL TOMORROW – IN RESPONSE TO THE LEWISTON MASS SHOOTINGS. AS WE KNOW, THE PROCESS TO REMOVE THE EVENTUAL GUNMAN’S WEAPONS THROUGH MAINE’S YELLOW FLAG LAW WAS NEVER INITIATED. THIS BILL WOULD DIRECT THE MILITARY TO USE STATE-LEVEL CRISIS INTERVENTION PROGRAMS. COLLINS – TELLING US INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS FROM THE LEWISTON COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE ARMY RESERVE AND ARMY INSPECTOR GENERAL áALLá SHOWED COMMUNICATION GAPS BETWEEN THE MILITARY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO CLOSE THAT GAP. THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO CLOSE THAT GAP BY REQUIRING OUR ARMED FORCES IN CERTAIN PRESCRIBED CIRCUMSTANCES TO SHARE WITH STATE, COUNTY AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION. WHEN A SERVICE MEMBER POSES A SERIOUS THREAT TO HIM OR HERSELF OR TO OTHERS OR HAS BEEN INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED TO A MENTAL HOSPITAL. AND I THINK THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FACTS OF THIS CASE THAT HAD THERE BEEN BETTER CO- OPS AND COMMUNICATION AND COORDINATION THAT THIS HORRIFIC MASS SHOOTING MIGHT WELL HAVE BEEN PREVENTED. 02:11 – 2:26 WE KNOW THAT THIS BILL HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR SOME TIME. I THINK THAT WE FIRST HEARD THAT YOU WERE DRAFTING THIS BILL BACK IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR. TOMORROW, ONCE THE TEXT OF THIS LEGISLATION IS MADE AVAILABLE, WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO SHARE WITH YOUR COLLEAGUES ON THE HILL TO TRY TO GET THIS PASSED? 2:55 – 4:37 THE WAY THAT WE ENVISION THIS WORKING IS THAT IF A SERVICE MEMBER HAS MADE SUCH SERIOUS, CREDIBLE THREATS TO HIM OR HERSELF OR TO OTHERS THAT THE MILITARY DECIDES TO REMOVE ALL OF THE MILITARY ISSUED WEAPONS FROM THE SERVICE MEMBER, THAT WOULD BE GROUNDS FOR TRIGGERING THE STATE’S YELLOW FLAG OR RED FLAG LAW OR OTHER CRISES INTERVENTION PROGRAM THAT COULD RESULT IN A COURT ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF PRIVATE FIREARMS THAT ARE OWNED BY THE SERVICE MEMBER. THE SAD CAN INSTANCE WOULD BE IF A SERVICE MEMBER IS INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED TO A HOSPITAL THAT TREATS PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS THAT TOO WOULD BE A TRIGGERING EVENT THAT WOULD CAUSE THE STATE CRISIS INTERVENTION EFFECT WHERE A JUDGE WOULD MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER PRIVATE WEAPONS SHOULD BE CONFISCATED FOR A TIME WHILE THE SERVICE MEMBER IS BEING TREATED. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS BILL IS DRAFTED IN A WAY THAT IT FULLY RESPECTS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF THE SERVICE MEMBER THERE IS A JUDICIAL PROCESS. THERE ARE DUE PROCESS PROTECTIONS. 02:58 – 03:18 IN TERMS OF EXISTING LAW. SENATOR, IS WHAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW ENOUGH IN MAINE. THERE ARE GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES THAT HAVE CALLED FOR A RED FLAG LAW. ULTIMATELY, THAT HAS NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN GETTING THROUGH. BUT WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL IN TERMS OF CALLING ON THE ARMY TO UTILIZE ALL OF THE RESOURCES THAT ARE AT THEIR DISPOSAL? 5:53 – 6:28 THE YELLOW FLAG LAWS HAVE THE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING VERY ROBUST DUE PROCESS PROTECT SINCE AND THEY REQUIRE A MEDICAL EVALUATION THAT SOMETIMES IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER RED FLAG LAWS WE’RE NOT TRYING IN THIS BILL TO MANDATE WHAT KINDS OF LAWS THAT STATES SHOULD HAVE WE ALSO ARE NOT CREATING A FEDERAL RED FLAG OR A FEDERAL YELLOW FLAG LAW. 03:28 – 3:47 THE LEWISTON COMMISSION’S FINAL REPORT WAS MORE OF A FACT FINDING MISSION. THAT’S WHAT THE COMMISSION CHAIR SAID DURING THE PRESS CONFERENCE WHEN THEY RELEASED THEIR FINDINGS. NOT MUCH IN THE WAY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY. DOES THAT MAKE YOUR JOB ANY MORE CHALLENGING OR IS IT EASIER WHEN YOU ARE PROPOSING A BILL LIKE THIS? 3:57 – 4:14 AND SENATOR COLLINS, HAVE YOU BEEN SATISFIED WITH THE CHANGES THAT THE ARMY AND THE ARMY RESERVE HAVE ALREADY ANNOUNCED FOR EXAMPLE? WE HEARD FROM THE THEN LEADER OF THE ARMY RESERVE THAT THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE CLOSING PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CASES BASED ON UNRESPONSIVENESS. 4:20 – 4:23 ALRIGHT. MAINE SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. THE EYES OF THE NATION ON TUESDAY NIGHT. WE’RE ON THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA FOR THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE BETWEEN VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS AND FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP. FOR SOME PERSPECTIVE AT A PREVIEW OF THIS WEEK’S IN THE ARENA PODCAST, WE’RE JOINED NOW BY OUR EXPERT PANELISTS. APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. SO THE MAIN QUESTION THAT YOU’RE ASKING THIS WEEK OF THE PODCAST IS WHO WON? YEAH, I THINK I THINK PHIL IS MOST PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT KAMALA HARRIS DID HERSELF A LOT OF GOOD AND DONALD TRUMP MAY NOT HAVE. RIGHT. CLEARLY, THIS WAS A VERY BIG INFLUENTIAL MOMENT FOR KAMALA HARRIS. SHE CAME THROUGH NOT ONLY DID SHE DEMONSTRATE SHE HAS THE GRAVITAS, IF YOU WILL, SHE DEMONSTRATED THAT SHE COULD PUT DONALD TRUMP ON THE DEFENSIVE AND HE GOT OFF HIS MESSAGE AND NEVER GOT BACK ON IT. ETHAN, WHAT DO YOU THINK? I THINK PHIL’S RIGHT ON ABOUT THAT. SHE WAS ON HER MESSAGE AND KNOCKING HIM OFF HIS MESSAGE ALL NIGHT. YOU REALLY EXPECTED HIM TO, YOU KNOW, CONSTANTLY BE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, SHE’S PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION NOW AND FOCUSING ON, YOU KNOW, WHY HASN’T SHE FIXED SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE COULD HAVE FIXED, ETC., ETC., EVEN THOUGH SHE CAN’T AS THE VICE PRESIDENT. BUT HE COULDN’T EVEN GIVE THAT MESSAGE ALL NIGHT LONG BECAUSE SHE WAS JUST THROWING JAB AFTER JAB. IT WAS REALLY YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WAS THE PROSECUTOR’S SIDE OF HER THAT JUST UNDERSTANDS HOW TO GET UNDER A DEFENSE ATTORNEY. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS PHIL SUGGESTED, SHE REALLY SHOWED HER OWN STATURE. SHE SHOWED HER OWN GRAVITAS THAT SHE IS GOING TO BE STRONG ENOUGH TO LEAD THIS COUNTRY, SMART ENOUGH TO LEAD THIS COUNTRY, HAVE THE VISION AND THE VALUES THAT ARE MOST CLOSELY REFLECTED IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. SO SHE DID HERSELF WELL AND SHE WANTS TO DEBATE AGAIN. AND THAT WOULD BE FUN IF THEY DO. I WOULD I WOULD JUST INTERJECT, AS SOMEONE WHO’S MODERATED A LOT OF DEBATES AND FORUMS OVER THE YEARS, GREAT CREDIT TO DAVID AND LINDSAY FROM ABC FOR TRYING TO MAKE THEM ANSWER SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND DOING SOME REAL TIME FACT CHECKING. HOWEVER, EVEN PRETTY MUCH NOBODY, NEITHER HARRIS NOR TRUMP, ANSWERED ANY YES OR NO QUESTIONS. WELL, I WOULD PUSH BACK A LITTLE BIT ON THAT, PAT. I FEEL LIKE SHE WAS VERY CLEAR ON ABORTION. SHE WOULD REINSTATE ROE V WADE. SHE WAS VERY CLEAR ON IMMIGRATION. SHE WANTS TO PASS THE BILL THAT THE SENATE NEGOTIATED THAT WOULD HAVE STRENGTHENED OUR BORDER. YOU KNOW, SHE WAS VERY CLEAR ON WHAT SHE’S GOING TO DO IN TERMS OF SMALL BUSINESSES. SO SHE WAS PRETTY CLEAR. NOW, SHE DIDN’T ANSWER EVERY ONE OF THEM. THERE WERE A FEW MOMENTS WHERE I WOULD HAVE LIKED HER TO SHOW A LITTLE MORE EMPATHY AND UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT THOSE AMERICANS WHO ARE STRUGGLING IN THIS ECONOMY HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH AND HOW SHE COULD HAVE DONE BETTER, HOW THE ADMINISTRATION WILL DO BETTER UNDER HER LEADERSHIP. BUT HE CERTAINLY DID NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I MEAN, I CAN’T THINK OF ONE WHERE HE WAS CLEAR IN A BLACK AND WHITE WAY. THIS IS WHAT I’M GOING TO DO IF I WERE IF I BECOME PRESIDENT. PHIL, IT SOUNDS LIKE ETHAN IS STILL PINING FOR BILL CLINTON. YEAH, NO QUESTION. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE CONTRAST TO ME IS THAT TRUMP WAS TRYING TO SAY, YEAH, LET’S GO BACK TO FOUR AND FOUR YEARS AGO. YEAH, WE SHOULD GO BACK TO LOWER MORTGAGE RATES, LOWER ENERGY PRICES, LOWER FOOD COSTS. YEAH, WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THAT ERA. AND SHE WAS TRYING TO SAY WE’RE GOING FORWARD AND INEFFECTIVELY. TRUMP DIDN’T GET HER TO TELL US, WELL, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT? BECAUSE YOU’RE ALREADY IN OFFICE, YOU’RE ALREADY HAD THREE AND A HALF YEARS TO DO THAT. WHERE’S THE BEEF, SO TO SPEAK? AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT’S GOING TO COME NEXT. SHE DID A GREAT JOB PRESENTING HERSELF. SHE NOW HAS CREDIBILITY. NOW, I THINK IT’S UP TO THE JOURNALISTS TO SAY, ALL RIGHT, FILL IN THE COLORS. IT SEEMS LIKE IN THIS POLITICAL CLIMATE, IT’S NOT NECESSARILY A CERTAINTY THAT A DEBATE IS GOING TO HAPPEN UNTIL THE CANDIDATES ARE ON THE DEBATE STAGE AND THE FIRST SERIES OF QUESTIONS ARE ASKED. THE VICE PRESIDENT ALREADY EXPRESSING SOME ENTHUSIASM TO GET BACK ON THE DEBATE STAGE. FOX NEWS IS OFFERING TO HOST IT. DO WE SEE A REMATCH? WELL, IT SAYS SHE FELT PRETTY GOOD ABOUT HOW IT WENT, AND I WOULDN’T BE AT ALL SURPRISED IF MAYBE TRUMP MIGHT LIKE A DO OVER AND TRY TO BE A LITTLE MORE FOCUSED. YEAH, WELL, WE’LL ALL BEEN WAITING FOR THAT. ááááEDIT OUT INTERRUPTIONáááá 8:58 – 11:34 I HOPE THERE’S ANOTHER ONE. I DON’T THINK THAT SHE’S GOING TO AGREE TO HAVE FOX NEWS HOSTED. HOWEVER, UNLESS THERE ARE SOME VERY DIFFERENT MODERATORS. GO INTO THE LION’S DEN. YOU GOT TO GO INTO THE LIKE. WELL, I THINK SHE SHOULD SHE COULD GO ON THERE AND BE WILLING TO BE INTERVIEWED. BUT I THINK YOU WANT A MORE NEUTRAL PLATFORM WHEN YOU’RE HAVING A DEBATE. ALSO, THE PODCAST THIS WEEK, YOU PLAYING WHO IS CORRECT, LOOKING AT SOME REALLY HOT BUTTON TOPICS THAT WE’VE BEEN DISCUSSING RECENTLY, THE YELLOW FLAG LAW. THIS HAS BEEN UNDER SUCH INTENSE SCRUTINY, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION INVESTIGATING THE LEWISTON MASS SHOOTING CAME OUT WITH THEIR REPORT, SOME VERY SHARP, POINTED CRITICISM AT THE SAGADAHOC COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE AND SPECIFICALLY DEPUTY AARON SKOLFIELD, WHO FAILED TO CONFRONT THE EVENTUAL SHOOTER DURING WELLNESS CHECKS JUST OVER A YEAR AGO NOW. WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT? WELL, YOU’RE RIGHT. THE GOVERNOR WAS CORRECT. AND WHEN SHE SAID THERE WERE FAILINGS BY THE ARMY RESERVE BOARD OFFICERS AND BY THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE, BUT THERE A GUN RIGHTS PEOPLE ARE ALSO SAYING EVEN THAT THEY THINK THE YELLOW FLAG LAW IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH AND THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD SOMETHING MORE LIKE A RED FLAG LAW. YEAH, LOOK, THE THE WAS THE GOVERNOR CORRECT TO SAY THAT THERE WAS HUMAN FAILING IN THIS? YES. BUT THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE HUMAN FAILING. AND THAT’S WHY THE GUN SAFETY GROUPS ARE CORRECT. THE YELLOW FLAG LAW SIMPLY DOESN’T WORK. IT FAILED US BECAUSE THERE WERE NO ALTERNATIVE MEANS. IT’S LIKE IT WAS A BOTTLENECK. THERE WAS ONLY ONE PATH TO STOP THIS GUY FROM GETTING HIS GUNS. AND IF YOU ADD HUMAN FAILURE, WHICH WE ALWAYS HAVE, 31 PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET SHOT. HAVING A RED FLAG LAW WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE FAMILY TO GO TO THE COURT, COULD HAVE ALLOWED LAW ENFORCEMENT TO GO DIRECTLY TO A COURT, A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO KNEW THIS GUY WAS A DANGER COULD HAVE GOTTEN RID OF HIS GUNS. SO THE GUN SAFETY GROUPS ARE CORRECT. THE YELLOW FLAG LAW FUNDAMENTALLY FAILED MAINE PEOPLE. WELL, YOU KNOW, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT IF YOU LOOK BACK AT WHERE THIS STARTED, IT STARTED WITH THE ARMY RESERVES. THEN IT WENT OVER TO THE SAGADAHOC COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE. THE YELLOW FLAG LAW WAS IN PLACE. IT WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED IN THIS TRAGEDY OCCURRED. AND I WOULD JUST POINT OUT TO THE VIEWERS THAT SINCE THIS TRAGEDY, ALMOST A YEAR HAS PASSED AND THE YELLOW FLAG LAW HAS BEEN USED OVER 330 TIMES SINCE THEN WITHOUT INCIDENT. GOVERNOR MILLS SEEMS TO THINK THAT STRENGTHENING THE YELLOW FLAG LAW AND INCREASING FIGHTING IN SOME OTHER AREAS IS GOING TO BE THE PATH TO SUCCESS. SO WE ASKED HER DURING THAT PRESS CONFERENCE WHETHER SHE WOULD SUPPORT A STRENGTHENED RED FLAG LAW. HOUSE SPEAKER RACHAEL TALBOT. ROSS WANTED TO SEE THAT GET THROUGH. LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION DIDN’T GO ANYWHERE. THE GOVERNOR SAID THAT THAT REALLY WASN’T HER FOCUS AT THIS POINT. áááCUT NRA – GOLDEN / THERIAULT DISCUSSIONááá 13:43 – 13:55 ALL RIGHT. SOME INTERESTING ANALYSIS FROM THE THREE OF YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND WELCOME HERE ON

Sen. Collins proposes military crisis intervention reform in response to Lewiston shooting

Bill co-sponsored by fellow Maine U.S. Sen. Angus King is called the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act.

Updated: 5:16 PM EDT Sep 16, 2024

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has authored a bill in response to last year’s Lewiston mass shooting that would require the U.S. military to use state crisis intervention laws when a service member poses a serious threat to themselves or others.The legislation is called the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act and has been co-sponsored by U.S. Sen. Angus King, also of Maine.Collins delivered remarks on the Senate floor Monday after the bill was introduced.On Oct. 25, 2023, Lewiston became the site of the deadliest shooting in Maine’s history when 18 people were killed and another 13 were injured by U.S. Army Reserve Sgt. 1st Class Robert Card.Multiple investigations were launched in response to the shooting. Reports from the Army Reserve, Army Inspector General and Lewiston Commission established by Maine Gov. Janet Mills indicate there were numerous missed opportunities to intervene to potentially separate Card from his firearms while he received mental health treatment. According to those reports, there was a clear lack of effective communication and coordination between the military and civilian law enforcement in many instances.The Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act would require military services to utilize state crisis intervention programs, such as Maine’s yellow flag law, and to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized by such laws — all while protecting service members’ Second Amendment and due process rights.”This bill would facilitate effective communication and coordination between state agencies and military service branches, thereby helping to keep our communities safe and ensuring that service members in crisis get the assistance they need, without infringing upon the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Collins said in a statement. “The Lewiston tragedy requires legislation and other changes to eliminate the communication gaps that the investigations have revealed. We have a chance to help service members in crisis. We have a chance to help protect our neighbors and families. We have a chance to save lives.””We cannot bring back our friends and family members we lost last October, but we can take steps to fix the cracks in the system that led to the tragedy,” King said in a statement. “This public safety threat is a complex problem that requires a wide range of approaches. While making sure that this bill has guardrails to protect the Second Amendment, this legislation strengthens the information sharing practices that can literally be the difference between life and death.”Key provisions in the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act include the following:The bill directs the U.S. Armed Forces to fully utilize state crisis intervention programs in certain circumstances, namely when a service member is determined to be unfit to possess military firearms due to them making a serious, credible threat of violence or when they have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution. “Fully utilize” is defined to mean taking action available to third parties under a state crisis intervention program, and providing relevant material facts to appropriate law enforcement or judicial personnel.The legislation directs the Armed Forces to produce, upon request, relevant evidence in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a state crisis intervention program in an effort to facilitate information sharing.The bill preserves the ability of states to craft crisis intervention programs that work best for them, and does not require them to adopt, modify or expand any of their crisis intervention programs. The legislation does not create a federal crisis intervention program, as the Armed Forces would simply operate within each state’s framework — provided the state programs adhere to the due process and Second Amendment protections detailed for such programs in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.As previously noted, the bill directs the Armed Forces to utilize state crisis intervention programs that include the due process and Second Amendment protections already specified by Congress.The legislation directs the Armed Forces to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a state crisis intervention program, including proceedings initiated by a current or former service member to modify or terminate a protection order to regain possession of their firearms when the military has evidence that may be helpful to their case.The bill does not affect the military’s existing authority to disarm service members of their service weapons in a broad range of situations that are unrelated to a serious, credible threat of violence or involuntary commitment to a mental institution — when it might not make sense to trigger a state crisis intervention program.Related content:

PORTLAND, Maine —

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine has authored a bill in response to last year’s Lewiston mass shooting that would require the U.S. military to use state crisis intervention laws when a service member poses a serious threat to themselves or others.

The legislation is called the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act and has been co-sponsored by U.S. Sen. Angus King, also of Maine.

Collins delivered remarks on the Senate floor Monday after the bill was introduced.

On Oct. 25, 2023, Lewiston became the site of the deadliest shooting in Maine’s history when 18 people were killed and another 13 were injured by U.S. Army Reserve Sgt. 1st Class Robert Card.

Multiple investigations were launched in response to the shooting. Reports from the Army Reserve, Army Inspector General and Lewiston Commission established by Maine Gov. Janet Mills indicate there were numerous missed opportunities to intervene to potentially separate Card from his firearms while he received mental health treatment. According to those reports, there was a clear lack of effective communication and coordination between the military and civilian law enforcement in many instances.

The Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act would require military services to utilize state crisis intervention programs, such as Maine’s yellow flag law, and to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized by such laws — all while protecting service members’ Second Amendment and due process rights.

“This bill would facilitate effective communication and coordination between state agencies and military service branches, thereby helping to keep our communities safe and ensuring that service members in crisis get the assistance they need, without infringing upon the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Collins said in a statement. “The Lewiston tragedy requires legislation and other changes to eliminate the communication gaps that the investigations have revealed. We have a chance to help service members in crisis. We have a chance to help protect our neighbors and families. We have a chance to save lives.”

“We cannot bring back our friends and family members we lost last October, but we can take steps to fix the cracks in the system that led to the tragedy,” King said in a statement. “This public safety threat is a complex problem that requires a wide range of approaches. While making sure that this bill has guardrails to protect the Second Amendment, this legislation strengthens the information sharing practices that can literally be the difference between life and death.”

Key provisions in the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act include the following:

• The bill directs the U.S. Armed Forces to fully utilize state crisis intervention programs in certain circumstances, namely when a service member is determined to be unfit to possess military firearms due to them making a serious, credible threat of violence or when they have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution. “Fully utilize” is defined to mean taking action available to third parties under a state crisis intervention program, and providing relevant material facts to appropriate law enforcement or judicial personnel.
• The legislation directs the Armed Forces to produce, upon request, relevant evidence in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a state crisis intervention program in an effort to facilitate information sharing.
• The bill preserves the ability of states to craft crisis intervention programs that work best for them, and does not require them to adopt, modify or expand any of their crisis intervention programs. The legislation does not create a federal crisis intervention program, as the Armed Forces would simply operate within each state’s framework — provided the state programs adhere to the due process and Second Amendment protections detailed for such programs in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
• As previously noted, the bill directs the Armed Forces to utilize state crisis intervention programs that include the due process and Second Amendment protections already specified by Congress.
• The legislation directs the Armed Forces to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a state crisis intervention program, including proceedings initiated by a current or former service member to modify or terminate a protection order to regain possession of their firearms when the military has evidence that may be helpful to their case.
• The bill does not affect the military’s existing authority to disarm service members of their service weapons in a broad range of situations that are unrelated to a serious, credible threat of violence or involuntary commitment to a mental institution — when it might not make sense to trigger a state crisis intervention program.

Related content: