Fully close the boyfriend loophole in gun laws.

Katherine M. Clark · Massachusetts · Democratic

policy impact 0.65 specificity 0.85 extraction confidence 96%

Commitment kind: unknown. Promised action: not established. Promised outcome: not established. Deadline: unknown; not assumed expired.

Contest this claim

Occurrences

Evidence

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

Section 12005 amended 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A)(ii) to include a misdemeanor domestic-violence offense committed by a person with a current or recent former dating relationship with the victim.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): Congress enacted a federal change covering dating partners for misdemeanor domestic-violence convictions, addressing a major part of the boyfriend loophole.

partial unknown

Public Law 117-159, Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 96%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

The same section says the amendments do not apply to convictions entered before enactment, and allows restoration for a single dating-relationship misdemeanor domestic-violence conviction after 5 years if no later disqualifying offense occurs.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The enacted law was not a full closure: it is prospective and includes a five-year restoration rule for one qualifying dating-relationship conviction.

partial unknown

Public Law 117-159, Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 94%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

The current definition of misdemeanor crime of domestic violence includes offenses committed by a person who has a current or recent former dating relationship with the victim; the dating-relationship provision includes the 5-year limitation for a single conviction.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): Current codified law confirms the dating-partner conviction coverage exists, but with the statutory limitation that prevents treating it as a complete fulfillment of 'fully close.'

partial unknown

18 U.S.C. 921, United States Code 2024 Edition
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 94%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) still applies to persons subject to qualifying court orders restraining conduct toward an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner or person.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The restraining-order firearm prohibition remains keyed to 'intimate partner,' not the newer 'dating relationship' definition.

never unknown

18 U.S.C. 922, United States Code 2024 Edition
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 91%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

18 U.S.C. 921(a)(32) defines intimate partner as a spouse, former spouse, co-parent, or cohabitant/former cohabitant; dating partners are added separately only for misdemeanor domestic-violence convictions.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): Because the protective-order provision uses the narrower intimate-partner definition, dating partners subject only to qualifying restraining orders are still not fully covered federally.

never unknown

18 U.S.C. 921, United States Code 2024 Edition
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 90%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

Roll Call 299 on S. 2938 passed 234-193. The vote table lists Clark (MA), Democratic, Massachusetts, voting Yea.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): Katherine Clark voted for the enacted Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that partially closed the boyfriend loophole.

partial unknown A for effort

Office of the Clerk, U.S. House Roll Call 299, S. 2938
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 98%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

Congress.gov summarizes H.R.1494 as prohibiting dating partners convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence or subject to certain restraining orders from receiving, possessing, shipping, or transporting firearms; the tracker status is Introduced, with latest House subcommittee referral on 2021-05-18.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): A more complete bill that would have covered dating partners under both conviction and restraining-order routes did not become law in the 117th Congress.

never unknown

H.R.1494 - Zero Tolerance for Domestic Abusers Act, Congress.gov
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 92%

Contest this evidence item

legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown

Congress.gov lists H.R.1620 as Passed House on 2021-03-17 by 244-172 and later referred in the Senate Judiciary Committee on 2022-05-24; the summary says the bill made changes to federal firearms laws.

Unverified model/legacy excerpt; not proof. AI summary (separate from source): The House advanced broader VAWA-related firearm-law changes, but that House-passed vehicle did not itself become the enacted route for fully closing the loophole.

partial unknown A for effort

H.R.1620 - Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2021, Congress.gov
secondary · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 78%

Contest this evidence item

Assessments

Public state: unverified As of unknown · legacy_unverified · . Original AI recommendation (not independently established): partial. same_term A for effort

Federal law was changed in 2022 to cover current or recent former dating partners for misdemeanor domestic-violence convictions, and Clark voted for the enacted Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. But the promise was to fully close the loophole, and the enacted law remains limited: it is prospective, has a five-year restoration rule for a single qualifying dating-relationship conviction, and the protective-order firearm prohibition still uses the narrower intimate-partner definition rather than fully covering dating partners. A broader approach that would have covered restraining orders did not become law. This supports partial delivery, not full fulfillment.

provider codex_cli · model gpt-5.5 · confidence 93%