By Elena Durnbaugh
Gongwer News Service
More people are accessing Michigan’s extreme risk protection orders two years after the laws first went into effect, the latest data from the State Court Administrative Office shows.
It’s a marked increase from the first year, but the fact that petitions are being denied shows that the laws are working as intended, said Johanna Kononen, associate director at the Michigan Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual Violence.
In 2025, 514 people filed ERPO complaints. All of them were filed against adults. In 2024, 384 complaints were filed against adults, and seven were filed against juveniles. Of the complaints filed in 2025, 407 were initially issued and 93 were denied.
Most of the requests were ex parte orders, where the petitioner asked the court to issue an order immediately. The evidentiary requirements for ex parte orders are higher because the petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that there will be immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage because of the delay required to give notice and that the notice itself will cause adverse action before the extreme risk protection order can be issued.
The increase in numbers, and the presence of denials, is good news, Kononen said. She also serves on the University of Michigan’s Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention Community Advisory Board.
“It was slow rolling out, and I think that this increase in the number of petitions is indicative that more people know about this and understand what they can ask for,” she said. “It’s encouraging as someone who was working with a lot of stakeholders across the state.”
Law enforcement and court officials have been working to make the laws clear for people, Konoen said, and the data gives reason to be cautiously optimistic.
“This is going into place for people who need it, and not those who don’t,” she said. “That has been a concern, that this was going to be a rubber stamp…The courts are really looking at these.”
Republicans, both in the Legislature and as candidates, have supported repealing the laws, but Kononen said law enforcement officials who were once previously skeptical have found it to be another helpful tool to keep people safe.
She stressed that removing people’s guns is always a temporary measure and is never permanent.
“The longer that this is in place and the more transparent courts are …the more comfortable people will be,” Kononen said.
Gongwer News Service
More people are accessing Michigan’s extreme risk protection orders two years after the laws first went into effect, the latest data from the State Court Administrative Office shows.
It’s a marked increase from the first year, but the fact that petitions are being denied shows that the laws are working as intended, said Johanna Kononen, associate director at the Michigan Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual Violence.
In 2025, 514 people filed ERPO complaints. All of them were filed against adults. In 2024, 384 complaints were filed against adults, and seven were filed against juveniles. Of the complaints filed in 2025, 407 were initially issued and 93 were denied.
Most of the requests were ex parte orders, where the petitioner asked the court to issue an order immediately. The evidentiary requirements for ex parte orders are higher because the petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that there will be immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage because of the delay required to give notice and that the notice itself will cause adverse action before the extreme risk protection order can be issued.
The increase in numbers, and the presence of denials, is good news, Kononen said. She also serves on the University of Michigan’s Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention Community Advisory Board.
“It was slow rolling out, and I think that this increase in the number of petitions is indicative that more people know about this and understand what they can ask for,” she said. “It’s encouraging as someone who was working with a lot of stakeholders across the state.”
Law enforcement and court officials have been working to make the laws clear for people, Konoen said, and the data gives reason to be cautiously optimistic.
“This is going into place for people who need it, and not those who don’t,” she said. “That has been a concern, that this was going to be a rubber stamp…The courts are really looking at these.”
Republicans, both in the Legislature and as candidates, have supported repealing the laws, but Kononen said law enforcement officials who were once previously skeptical have found it to be another helpful tool to keep people safe.
She stressed that removing people’s guns is always a temporary measure and is never permanent.
“The longer that this is in place and the more transparent courts are …the more comfortable people will be,” Kononen said.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
