Blair Holt Firearm Owner Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill creates a comprehensive federal regulatory framework for firearm ownership and transfers, aiming to reduce gun violence through licensing, record-keeping, and safe storage mandates.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a federal licensing system for individuals to possess "qualifying firearms" (handguns and certain semi-automatic rifles) and a federal record of sale system for these firearms. It mandates background checks, mental health evaluations, and safe storage requirements, while also prohibiting most private firearm transfers without a licensed dealer's involvement.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue the bill is a necessary step to curb gun violence by ensuring that only responsible, vetted individuals can own certain firearms, facilitating tracing of firearms used in crimes, and promoting safe storage to prevent accidental shootings and suicides. They point to the bill's findings on the prevalence of gun violence and mass shootings as justification for federal intervention.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue that the bill infringes upon Second Amendment rights by imposing burdensome licensing requirements and creating a national firearm registry. They may contend that it criminalizes law-abiding citizens, does not deter criminals who obtain firearms illegally, and places undue financial and administrative burdens on firearm owners.
The bill is moderately detailed, requiring careful reading to understand its full implications, which may be challenging given typical legislative timelines.
Title I, Sec. 101, adding 18 U.S.C. 922(aa)
Federal Firearm Owner Licensing Requirement
This provision makes it unlawful for any individual (other than licensed dealers, manufacturers, etc.) to possess a "qualifying firearm" (handgun or certain semi-automatic rifle) without a valid federal or certified state firearm owner license after an "applicable date" (1 or 2 years post-enactment, depending on acquisition date). It includes exemptions for law enforcement, military, supervised minors, and individuals at shooting ranges.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures that individuals possessing potentially dangerous firearms have undergone a vetting process, reducing the likelihood of firearms falling into prohibited hands and promoting responsible ownership.
Critics contend
Opponents would contend that this constitutes an unconstitutional prior restraint on Second Amendment rights, creating a de facto registration system and burdening law-abiding citizens with unnecessary bureaucracy and fees.
Tradeoffs
Balances public safety concerns by restricting firearm access against individual rights to firearm ownership.
Title I, Sec. 102, adding 18 U.S.C. 923(m)
Firearm Owner License Application and Vetting Process
This section details the application process for a firearm owner license, requiring a photograph, personal information, certifications regarding prohibited status (including mental health history, intellectual disabilities, protection orders, and certain misdemeanor convictions), fingerprints, and a fee (not exceeding $10). It mandates a fingerprint-based nationwide criminal background check and a mental health evaluation if the applicant was a patient in a mental health facility more than 5 years prior. Licenses are valid for 5 years and are revocable if the individual becomes prohibited.
Title I, Sec. 102, adding 18 U.S.C. 923(m)(6)
Mandated Surrender of Licenses and Firearms Upon Denial/Revocation
This provision mandates that individuals whose firearm owner license is denied or revoked must surrender their license and transfer any qualifying firearms they own or control within 48 hours. Firearms must be transferred to a location not immediately accessible to the individual, not their residence, vehicle, or storage space, or to a person outside their household. A firearm disposition record must also be submitted.
Title II, Sec. 201, adding 18 U.S.C. 922(cc)
Universal Background Checks and Licensed Dealer Facilitation for Qualifying Firearm Transfers
This provision makes it unlawful for any person (not a licensed dealer, manufacturer, etc.) to sell, deliver, or transfer a qualifying firearm to another unlicensed person, or to receive one, unless a licensed dealer facilitates the transfer. The transferee must present a valid firearm owner license, the dealer must verify its validity with the Attorney General or state agency, and record a tracking authorization number.
Title II, Sec. 202, adding 18 U.S.C. 935 and amending 18 U.S.C. 926(a)
Federal Firearm Record of Sale System and Repeal of Registration Prohibition
This section requires licensed dealers to submit reports of qualifying firearm transfers to the Attorney General (or certified state agency) within 14 days, including manufacturer, model, serial number, date of receipt, transferee's license number, and transferor's name/address. The Attorney General must establish and maintain a Federal record of sale system based on these reports. Crucially, it amends 18 U.S.C. 926(a) by striking the second sentence, which currently prohibits the establishment of a federal system of firearm registration.
Title III, Sec. 301, adding 18 U.S.C. 922(dd)
Expanded Universal Background Checks for All Firearm Transfers
This provision prohibits any unlicensed person from transferring a firearm to another unlicensed person unless a licensed dealer first takes possession of the firearm to comply with existing background check requirements (18 U.S.C. 922(t)). Exceptions are made for law enforcement, certain family transfers (spouses, domestic partners, parents/children, siblings, aunts/uncles/nieces/nephews, grandparents/grandchildren), transfers by operation of law (estates), temporary transfers for imminent harm, NFA-approved transfers, and temporary transfers for specific activities like target shooting or hunting under supervision.
Title III, Sec. 305, adding 18 U.S.C. 922(hh)
Federal Child Access Prevention Law
This provision makes it unlawful for a person to keep a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition, in premises under their control if they know or recklessly disregard the risk that a child (under 18) can access it, and either know/recklessly disregard the risk the child will cause death/serious injury, or know/should know child possession is unlawful, AND a child uses the firearm to cause death or serious bodily injury. Exceptions include secured firearms, law enforcement/military duties, lawful self-defense by the child, or no reasonable expectation of a child's presence.
Defines "qualifying firearm" as a handgun or a semiautomatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable ammunition feeding device, excluding antique firearms. A "detachable ammunition feeding device" is defined as a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device detachable from a semiautomatic rifle with a capacity of, or readily convertible to, more than 10 rounds of ammunition (excluding .22 caliber rimfire tubular devices).
Sec. 3(b), amending 18 U.S.C. 921(a)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to consolidate definitions. However, its specific wording significantly narrows or broadens the bill's impact, making it a key detail for understanding the bill's reach.
Case for: Supporters would argue this definition targets firearms most commonly used in violent crimes and mass shootings, focusing regulatory efforts where they are most needed to enhance public safety.
Case against: Opponents would argue that this definition is overly broad, encompassing many common firearms used for sport, hunting, and self-defense, and that it is designed to restrict ownership of popular firearms.
Estimated impact: Significantly impacts the types of firearms subject to federal licensing and record-keeping, affecting millions of existing and future firearm owners.
Amends 18 U.S.C. 926(a) by striking the second sentence, which currently states: "Provided further, That no such rule or regulation prescribed by the Attorney General may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, controlled, or operated by the United States Government, or any State or political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions be established." The removal of this sentence explicitly allows for a federal system of registration.
Title II, Sec. 202(b), amending 18 U.S.C. 926(a)
Why it matters:While technically an amendment to existing law, the political sensitivity of "gun registration" means its explicit repeal might be less highlighted than other provisions.
Case for: Proponents argue this repeal is necessary to allow the federal government to establish effective record-keeping and tracing systems, which are currently hampered by the prohibition on a national registry.
Case against: Opponents would argue this is a direct and intentional step towards a national firearm registry, which they view as a precursor to confiscation and a violation of Second Amendment rights, and that it is deliberately obscured.
Estimated impact: Enables the creation of a comprehensive federal database of firearm sales, fundamentally changing the landscape of firearm regulation.
Specifies different effective dates for various parts of the Act: most amendments take effect 1 year after enactment, firearm records (Sec. 202) take effect on enactment (except 935(a) which is 1 year after enactment), and firearm transfers (Sec. 301(a) and (b)) take effect 180 days after enactment.
Title IX, Sec. 901
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to include effective dates at the end. The staggered nature reflects the administrative lead time needed for different systems.
Case for: Proponents would argue that staggered effective dates allow agencies and the public sufficient time to prepare for the new regulations, ensuring a smoother transition and implementation.
Case against: Opponents might argue that the staggered dates, particularly the immediate effect of some record-keeping provisions, are designed to quickly establish a registry before full public awareness of the bill's implications.
Estimated impact: Determines the timeline for compliance and enforcement, affecting when individuals and businesses must adapt to the new rules.