Washington, D.C. – A federal initiative aimed at restoring gun rights now allows individuals with domestic violence convictions to seek reinstatement, a move that has sparked significant concern and controversy among advocates for victims of such crimes. Former U.S. pardon attorney Elizabeth Oyer alleges that political considerations influenced this decision, specifically implicating Mel Gibson, who had a history of domestic violence and close ties to former President Donald Trump.
In her complaint filed with the Justice Department’s inspector general, Oyer claims that she was told by Associate Deputy Attorney General Paul Perkins that domestic abusers could not be excluded from the restoration program due to the need to provide relief for Gibson. Perkins has adamantly denied these allegations, labeling them as “categorically false” and asserting that he never made such statements to Oyer.
Oyer advocated for a policy that would prevent anyone with domestic violence convictions from regaining firearm access as the restoration program was being formulated. She suggested consulting with the DOJ’s Office on Violence Against Women to understand the risks involved. Oyer asserts that her concerns were disregarded, allegedly because of the connections between Gibson and Trump.
Under the newly implemented rules by Attorney General Todd Blanche, the program allows individuals, including those with misdemeanor domestic violence charges, to submit applications for gun rights restoration. While the department states that requests will typically be denied for ten years unless extraordinary circumstances are demonstrated, this broad eligibility raises alarms amongst domestic violence advocates.
Gibson’s plea in 2011 to misdemeanor spousal battery led to the loss of his firearm rights, but his conviction was vacated in 2014 following the completion of his sentence. His later appointment as an “ambassador” to Hollywood by Trump and the reinstatement of his gun rights, reportedly just a month after Oyer’s departure from the department, has intensified scrutiny over the program’s intentions.
As the development of the program progressed, Oyer’s staff identified potential candidates for firearms restoration, but Gibson was not among them initially. She claims that Perkins pressured her to include Gibson in the final recommendations. Despite her reluctance, a memo regarding Gibson was submitted the day after her conversation with Perkins, signaling a contentious internal debate just before she was dismissed from her role.
Following her firing in March 2025, Oyer filed a lawsuit against the DOJ and Blanche, claiming her termination violated her rights under various laws, including the First Amendment. The lawsuit suggests she was forced to choose between her professional obligations and facilitating a political favor linked to Gibson’s celebrity status and his relationship with Trump.
Domestic violence advocates are sounding the alarm regarding the implications of the current policy. Tonia Moultry-Pace, interim president and CEO of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, stated that allowing convicted abusers access to firearms significantly increases the risk of lethal violence against their partners. She emphasized that protections against gun access for these offenders are essential to safeguarding survivors and preventing future tragedies.
As the federal program continues to unfold amid mounting legal and social challenges, scrutiny of its impact on victims and the rationale behind political influences in gun rights restoration remains a pressing concern for many Americans.