Author: CCRC Staff

Editorial staff of the Collateral Consequences Resource Center

Maine governor vetoes clean slate bill

On April 29, Maine governor Janet Mills vetoed a bill that would have authorized automatic sealing of many misdemeanor convictions after five conviction-free years, and made Maine the 14th state to adopt a “clean slate” record relief measure.  Efforts to override her veto failed, but supporters of the failed record relief bill vowed to bring it back in the next legislative session.

Our recent annual report notes that Illinois became the 13th “clean slate” state when Governor Pritzker signed it into law in January.  The Illinois law’s provisions are explained in a post we published last fall.

In support of her veto, Governor Mills’ letter cited the bill’s extension to domestic violence convictions, as well as recurring concerns held by opponents of automatic sealing: cost and constitutionality.

There are several significant problems with the legislation. First, as drafted, L.D. 1911 would mandate the sealing of records for Class D domestic violence assault – a result that is plainly contrary to the public interest. Second, a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit strongly suggests that categorically sealing criminal records without conducting a case-by-case review of the circumstances violates the First Amendment. Third, this legislation would commit the State to hiring seven permanent employees to conduct the work of sealing records. Only a fraction of this cost has been appropriated. This is a significant on-going expense that could be avoided by allowing interested persons to request that their records be sealed, rather that requiring the Judicial Branch to seal all records eligible records as a matter of course.

The bill’s supporters argued that the inclusion of domestic violence convictions was an acknowledged clerical error that would have been corrected in the implementation process, and that the governor’s other objections (cost and constitutionality) were overblown, and outweighed by the advantages for the many Maine citizens who stood to gain from the bill, which had been passed with bipartisan support.  They pointed out that the petition-based sealing process enacted in 2024 is rarely used, largely because of the difficulties faced by individuals navigating the judicial process.  The bill would have given thousands of deserving Mainers new opportunities for employment and housing.

While efforts to override the governor’s veto fell short this year, the bill’s primary sponsor stated that “There is a commitment to working in a future Legislature on bringing this proposal back. . . .  A lot of the groundwork, momentum and excitement for this has been growing.”

 

Criminal record reforms continue to deliver in 2025

For almost a decade, at the beginning of each new year, CCRC has published a report describing and evaluating record reforms enacted in the previous year. Our reports have documented the steady progress of what we characterized six years ago as “a full-fledged law reform movement” aimed at restoring rights and status to individuals who have successfully navigated the criminal law system.

Our 2025 report on newly enacted record reforms is a bit late this year due to technical difficulties with our website, but it shows that the steady progress of law reform has continued. In fact, 2025 was the most productive legislative year since 2020, measured in sheer numbers of new laws. Even Congress got into the record reform act in 2025, approving a bill to enact the very first federal expungement law, for survivors of human trafficking convicted of crime related to their trafficked status.  President Trump signed this bill into law in early 2026, and it is described in the Federal profile from the Restoration of Rights Project. (We expect to publish a comprehensive analysis of human trafficking record relief laws in coming weeks.)

Our report for this year has a different format, aimed at highlighting what has been accomplished by the states.  While we recognize Alabama and Virginia as having enacted the most impressive slates of new laws in 2025, we commend several other states for noteworthy accomplishments. Additional details on specific reform measures mentioned in the report can be found in the relevant state profiles from CCRC’s Restoration of Rights Project.

Having had an opportunity to preview what’s coming in 2026, we are excited to see that even in an election year there will be a continuing expansion of record clearing opportunities.  Two states have already enacted a broad regime of automatic sealing (Maine and Illinois), and bills making their way through the process reduce access barriers like lengthy waiting periods, outstanding court debt and application-related costs. We can already see efforts to improve records management to accommodate automation of record clearance.  Several states have enacted broad occupational licensing reforms, an area where bipartisan interest has benefitted from helpful model laws, and from federal efforts to support entrepreneurship by people with a criminal history.  Programs to avoid conviction through judicial diversion and deferred adjudication are also being expanded.  We have come a long way in the past decade, and there is evidently still a hearty appetite for reform. 

Restoration of firearm rights after conviction: Findings and recommendations

We are pleased to publish an updated version of our report on state laws governing loss and restoration of firearm rights after a criminal conviction: Restoration of Firearm Rights After Conviction: A National Survey and Recommendations for Reform.

This report, a version of which was originally published in June of 2025, finds that felony dispossession laws in most states extend well beyond what is necessary to advance public safety objectives, and that the process for regaining lost rights tends to be difficult to navigate if accessible at all.

Our report argues that broad categorical dispossession laws are more vulnerable to constitutional challenge under the Second Amendment where a state does not provide an easily accessible process for restoring rights based on an individualized assessment of public safety risk. It makes a number of recommendations to this end, which are summarized at the end of this post.  

Since our report was first published six months ago, there have been some changes in state laws warranting an update. More significant, however, in July 2025 the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) proposed to revive a long-dormant program under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c) for restoring rights lost under the federal dispossession statute. Originally administered by ATF, the revived program will be administered by DOJ’s Office of the Pardon Attorney. We decided that this development was important to cover in what is otherwise a report on state law, because of the close relationship between state and federal dispossession laws.

In a related development, DOJ seems to agree with our report’s argument that the existence of an accessible restoration mechanism may cure constitutional deficiency in a dispossession statute. Thus, the U.S. Solicitor General relied upon the renewed availability of administrative relief from federal restrictions under § 925(c) in arguing that the Supreme Court should decline to grant review in the case of a Utah woman federally dispossessed because of a dated conviction for food stamp fraud. See Brief for the Respondent in Opposition, Vincent v. Bondi, No. 24-1155, at 9 (Aug.11, 2025). For a review of Second Amendment cases on the radar of the Supreme Court this Term, see Kelsey Dallas, Second Amendment in the spotlight, SCOTUSblog (Nov. 13, 2025).

Read more

Update on federal firearms restoration program

Last spring, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its intention to revive a long-dormant program to remove federal restrictions on firearm possession, including for those with a criminal record.  In July DOJ published for comment a proposed rule that would, when finalized, accomplish this for people who are determined to pose no public safety risk. See 18 U.S.C. § 925(c). See Trump’s Justice Department aims to restore gun rights for nonviolent offenders.

The comment period closed on October 20, and it is therefore possible that a final rule will be published at any time to launch the revived program. This will open the door, for the first time in more than 30 years, to many individuals who have been unable to regain their firearm rights because of their criminal record. It is anticipated that thousands of people will want to apply for this relief, which will be administered by the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney.

Read more

New information about revived federal firearm restoration process

On March 20 of this year, the Justice Department announced its intention to revive the long-dormant administrative process for restoring federal firearm rights lost because of a criminal conviction. It did not explain how it intended to do this.

We have now learned more about how the revived federal firearm restoration process will work.

The DOJ budget for FY 2026 published on June 13 confirms that, while a number of departmental components will be reduced or phased out entirely, the Office of the Pardon Attorney has an entirely new responsibility and additional funding for “leading the Department’s initiative on creating and establishing a process for restoring firearm rights to citizens.”

Read more