State and County Trends in Florida's Extreme Risk Protection Order Implementation: A Descriptive Policy Analysis

Extreme Risk Protection Order statutes allow temporary firearm removal and possession prohibition during periods of extreme risk of self- or other-directed harm. Prior research suggests most frequent use for White men, but population rates are underexamined. This study's objective was to describe county-specific frequency and rate of Extreme Risk Protection Order petitioning by respondent demographics across Florida's first 3.8 years of policy implementation.

Extreme Risk Protection Order petitions filed from March 9, 2018 to December 31, 2021 were obtained directly from court records or through public records requests from 65 of 67 Florida counties. Age, gender, and race or ethnicity of Extreme Risk Protection Order respondents were identified from petitions and aggregated by county and year. Petitioning rates per 100,000 resident-years were calculated and mapped to visualize incidence by county tertiles (no/low, moderate, and high use). Total petitioning incidence and incidence by respondent demographics were compared between tertiles and within tertiles over time.

In total, 8,611 petitions were filed. Extreme Risk Protection Order petitioning generally increased over time, with greatest variability in moderate-use counties. State wide, petitioning rates were higher for White residents than for other race and ethnicity groups. Yet, in low-use counties, Black residents were subject to Extreme Risk Protection Orders at rates comparable with those of White residents, and in 2021, petitioning for Black residents was comparable or higher than for White residents in moderate- and high-use counties. Women, older adults, and residents of one third of Florida's counties rarely received Extreme Risk Protection Orders.

Despite overall increased use, the relative rareness per capita and unevenness of Extreme Risk Protection Order petitioning state wide implies disparate policy implementation experiences among residents, potentially complicating attainment of intended policy effects.