Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has taken the position—consistent with the NRA’s—that nonviolent felons retain their Second Amendment rights.
Uthmeier advanced this position in Morgan v. State of Florida, now before the state’s First District Court of Appeal. Morgan was convicted in 2007 of a third-degree felony under Pennsylvania law for carrying a firearm without a license. During a 2022 traffic stop, he informed law enforcement that he had a firearm in his car’s center console. He was then charged with possession of a firearm by a felon. Morgan moved to dismiss, arguing that the law is unconstitutional. After the trial court upheld his conviction, Morgan appealed.
During the appeal, the State initially defended the conviction. But on February 13, 2026, it notified the court that it had changed its position. On March 18, Attorney General Uthmeier filed a supplemental brief [JG1] explaining the shift.
Applying the Supreme Court’s text-and-history test, the brief contends that firearm prohibitions for nonviolent felons cannot be justified. As to text, it argues that Morgan—despite his felony conviction—remains among “the people” protected by the Second Amendment. As to history, it found that “English, Founding-era, and Reconstruction-era firearm regulations disarmed dangerous persons who (1) by virtue of a prior offense or other evidence in the record, had demonstrated a proclivity for violence or breaching the peace; (2) were involved in activities that were potentially dangerous; or (3) possessed qualities or traits indicating that their possession of firearms could threaten public safety.” Whether an individual fits within one of those categories, the brief argues, is the proper test for determining when disarmament is permissible.
While acknowledging that “most felonies indicate dangerousness,” the brief maintains that Morgan’s did not, and that no “record evidence suggested that Morgan might pose a danger or risk to public safety.”
The Attorney General’s position is consistent with the NRA-ILA’s litigation efforts to vindicate the Second Amendment rights of nonviolent felons. As the brief makes clear, the Second Amendment was never understood to allow the disarmament of peaceable citizens
NRA-ILA also supports the Trump administration’s efforts to revive restoration of rights under the Gun Control Act of 1968, including in comments submitted in response to a proposed rulemaking to accomplish that objective. While any statutory prohibition on Second Amendment rights relating to a criminal conviction should be narrowly tailored to avoid constitutional overbreadth, restoration is an important backstop. It both encourages and recognizes rehabilitation and provides for case-by-case review of convictions that may narrowly fall within the margins of a statutory prohibition but for which extenuating circumstances may be present.
Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org for future updates on NRA-ILA’s ongoing efforts to defend your constitutional rights, and please visit www.nraila.org/litigation to keep up to date on NRA-ILA’s ongoing litigation efforts.
More Like This From Around The NRA
