Why a Interstate Threats conviction matters
Section 875(c) covers interstate communications containing threats to kidnap or injure another person. Even when no physical injury occurred, the offense is built around threatened violence and is therefore materially different from an ordinary financial or property felony.
How DOJ’s current restoration rule may treat the offense
Threat-based conduct can trigger a permanent presumption under the current restoration framework. The exact judgment and underlying facts should be reviewed before assuming any time period will cure the issue.
Protective orders, stalking, domestic-violence context, repeated threats, weapon references, or later similar conduct can create additional federal firearm and restoration issues.
What records should be reviewed?
For a felony-based firearm disability, DOJ currently directs applicants to gather the charging document, judgment of conviction, and official proof of the date the final sentence requirement was completed. Depending on the case, the plea agreement, factual basis, presentence report, prior restoration applications, and state criminal-history records may also be required. See the complete Federal Restoration Required Documents Checklist →
State law can still change the answer
If the interstate threats conviction was entered in state court, a pardon, set-aside, expungement, restoration of civil rights, or firearm-specific order may affect whether the conviction continues to count for federal firearm purposes. The legal effect of the actual order matters. Use the Gun Rights by State guides to identify the separate state layer.
What should you do next?
Start with the Eligibility Review if you are not sure which restoration path fits. If a federal § 925(c) application appears relevant, use the shorter federal restoration services. You can also read the September 2026 DOJ update and the main gun-rights restoration FAQ.
Frequently asked questions
A conviction for interstate threats generally presents a difficult restoration case because threatened violence is directly relevant to DOJ’s public-safety analysis. The exact language, context, and conviction statute matter.
Threat-based conduct can trigger a permanent presumption under the current restoration framework. The exact judgment and underlying facts should be reviewed before assuming any time period will cure the issue. The exact judgment and underlying conduct should be reviewed before relying on a general category.
Start with the charging document, judgment, plea or trial disposition, sentencing records, official proof of when the final sentence requirement was completed, and copies of any prior pardon or rights-restoration order. DOJ also currently requires state criminal-history records covering the applicable period.
Not necessarily. Probation, parole, supervised release, community service, restitution, fines, or other criminal sentence requirements can affect the final sentence-completion date.
Sometimes, particularly for state convictions, but federal law looks at the legal effect of the relief. A pardon, expungement, set-aside, or restoration of civil rights should be reviewed under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20) and current state law.
No. Filing an eligibility review, a FelonJustice intake, or an official DOJ application does not suspend a firearm prohibition. Relief must actually be effective under every applicable federal, state, and tribal rule.