The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
August 4, 2025
Quarterly Article
David B. Joyce
Jeffrey Swanson
Jul 2, 2025
Jun 4, 2025
Jun 2, 2025
Back to The Milbank Quarterly – Old
Policy Points:
See all articles in the special issue, Mental Health and Substance Use Challenges Facing the United States: What Can State Policymakers Do?
Context: Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are an effective legal tool for reducing firearm suicide by temporarily removing access to firearms for certain individuals who exhibit dangerous behavior. Unlike most state laws restricting access to firearms based on status, ERPOs are predicated on the assessment of future risk of harm to self or other, as determined by civil court file finding. Emerging research indicates that separating those in crisis from lethal means reduces firearm mortality. We assess Maine’s unique approach and consider whether it is a replicable policy option for other states or should be modified to comport with other states’ more broadly applicable model.
Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with stakeholders in Maine and in three comparison states—Connecticut, Maryland, and Vermont. Interviewees included law enforcement officers, prosecutors, mental health practitioners, medical practitioners, and educational leaders and researchers. We utilized qualitative analysis software and grouped results into themes, concepts, and recommendations that addressed implementation barriers and facilitators.
Findings: Maine’s statutory approach to risk-based firearm removal provides an opportunity for comparison with other ERPO states. Maine’s requirement that a person be deemed mentally ill excludes other dangerous people from involuntary firearm seizure. Additionally, Maine’s mandated provider evaluation promotes tension between law enforcement and the medical community, as many providers are disinclined to perform the required evaluations. Maine’s efforts to separate those at risk of self-harm or harm to others could be improved through adoption of more traditional ERPO policies.
Conclusions: No policy alone can eliminate gun violence in the United States. However, many lives can be saved by a state law that authorizes time-limited, civil court–ordered removal of firearms. Maine’s narrower version, a risk-based firearm removal law, could be amended to comport with other states’ ERPO laws, which have been shown to prevent many suicides.