I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 276

To repeal section 658 of Public Law 104–208, commonly referred to as 

the Lautenberg amendment. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 8, 2003

Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, and Mr. PAUL) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To repeal section 658 of Public Law 104–208, commonly 

referred to as the Lautenberg amendment.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘States’ Rights and Sec5 ond and Tenth Amendment Restoration Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. 

7 (a) CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS:

8 (1) Domestic Violence remains a very serious 

9 problem in the United States. It is a dangerous 
2

•HR 276 IH 

1 crime and should be punished as such, including, 

2 where appropriate, as a felony. 

3 (2) Many States have classified Domestic Vio4 lence crimes as misdemeanors, others as felonies. 

5 States are the proper authority, rather than the 

6 Federal Government, to classify Domestic Violence 

7 offenses. 

8 (3) Where appropriate, States should classify 

9 Domestic Violence offenses as a felony. 

10 (4) Section 658 of Public Law 104–208, com11 monly referred to as the Lautenberg amendment, 

12 oversteps Federal authority, violating States’ rights, 

13 because no nexus has been shown to exist between 

14 Domestic Violence and interstate commerce. 

15 (5) The Lautenberg amendment does not deal 

16 with a subject delegated to Congress under article I, 

17 section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 

18 and is therefore unconstitutional under the tenth 

19 amendment to the Constitution, as interpreted by 

20 United States v. Lopez. 

21 (6) The Lautenberg amendment oversteps 

22 Congress’s power to regulate commerce as delineated 

23 by the Commerce Clause of the United States Con24 stitution. 
3

•HR 276 IH 

1 (7) Some of the strictest gun control laws are 

2 found in cities where the number of incidents of 

3 guns being used in violent crimes is the highest. 

4 Therefore, the Lautenberg amendment does not re5 duce incidents of domestic violence. 

6 (8) State and Federal judges already have the 

7 power to deny persons convicted of misdemeanors 

8 the right to possess firearms as a condition of proba9 tion or parole. 

10 (9) The Lautenberg amendment is an unfunded 

11 Federal mandate because States are liable for the 

12 costs of monitoring those citizens who have been 

13 banned for life from owning a firearm. Many times 

14 this lifetime ban is a result of a misdemeanor, not 

15 a felony. 

16 (10) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

17 of Public Law 104–208 violates all notions of con18 stitutional due process and constitutes an ex post 

19 facto law because it imposes a criminal penalty on 

20 crimes which were not subject to that penalty at the 

21 time of the Act. 

22 (11) Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend 

23 themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million 

24 times every year. Of these self-defense cases, as 
4

•HR 276 IH 

1 many as 200,000 are by women defending them2 selves against sexual assault. 

3 (12) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

4 of Public Law 104–208 will, if allowed to stand, re5 sult in the disarming of millions of citizens, includ6 ing women, on account of misdemeanor offenses 

7 which, in many cases, were committed long before 

8 the effective date of that Act. 

9 (13) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

10 of Public Law 104–208 will, in many cases, disarm 

11 battered women who need access to firearms in 

12 order to protect themselves from their battering 

13 spouses as well as from common criminals. 

14 (14) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

15 of Public Law 104–208 will, if allowed to stand, im16 pose a lifetime gun ban on persons who committed 

17 acts so minor that they were not even entitled to a 

18 jury trial prior to conviction. 

19 (15) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

20 of Public Law 104–208, will, if allowed to stand, re21 sult in the disarming and dismissal of a significant 

22 number of law enforcement officers and American 

23 servicemen, on account of misdemeanors, which in 

24 many cases, were committed long before the effective 

25 date of that Act. 
5

•HR 276 IH 

1 (16) Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion 

2 of Public Law 104–208 ignores the real problem 

3 surrounding domestic violence in that truly violent 

4 offenders are allowed to plea-bargain down to mis5 demeanors. 

6 (b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this Act to re7 store States’ rights, the tenth amendment, and second 

8 amendment freedoms. 

9 SEC. 3. REPEALER. 

10 Section 658 of the Treasury-Postal portion of Public 

11 Law 104–208 is repealed and is null and void as if it had 

12 not been enacted, and all provisions of law amended by 

13 such section are restored as if section 658 had not been 

14 enacted. 

15 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

16 This Act shall take effect as if included in the Treas17 ury-Postal portion of Public Law 104–208. Any liability, 

18 penalty, or forfeiture incurred by any person by reason 

19 of the application of any amendment made by section 658 

20 of the Treasury-Postal portion of Public Law 104–208 is 

21 hereby extinguished, and any action or prosecution for the 

22 enforcement of any such liability, penalty, or forfeiture 

23 shall not be sustained.

Æ