BLOG


The logo for Netzer, Krautter Law Firm
By Joel Krautter January 19, 2026
For decades, millions of Americans have lived under a federal ban preventing them from owning or possessing firearms due to past criminal convictions. Many of these individuals have long since completed their sentences, rebuilt their lives, and become law-abiding citizens — yet they remain barred from exercising their Second Amendment rights. That could soon change. A new federal rule proposal may reopen the long-dormant 18 U.S.C. § 925(c) program, which allows qualifying individuals to apply for restoration of their federal firearm rights through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). While it is unknown exactly how many individuals this may apply to, some estimates have this number in the millions. In July of 2025 the United States Department of Justice published the proposed rule for public comment. In October 2025 the public comment period closed. It is anticipated that sometime in 2026 the final rule will be published and an application process will be opened. The attorneys at Netzer Krautter Law Firm, P.C. are preparing now to help Montanans and clients nationwide navigate this long-awaited opportunity and try to get ahead of what will almost certainly become a massive backlog of applications. Montana is a Restorative Rights State Montana has long recognized the principle that individuals who have completed their sentences should have the opportunity to regain their civil rights. Under Article II, Section 28 of the Montana Constitution, it states: “Laws for the punishment of crime shall be founded on the principles of prevention and reformation. Full rights are restored by termination of state supervision for any offense against the state.” This means that once an individual has completed all terms of a Montana sentence — including parole or probation — their state civil rights, including firearm rights under Montana law, are typically restored. However, federal firearm prohibitions remain in place unless relief is granted under federal law — which is where 18 U.S.C. § 925(c) and the new rule comes in. For Montanans, this proposed change represents the long-overdue chance to align federal firearm rights with the restorative intent of our state constitution. Why Preparation Now Matters If the § 925(c) program reopens, the ATF will be flooded with applications from across the nation. Those who prepare early will have a significant advantage once filing begins. Just as with other federal benefit or licensing programs, complete, well-prepared applications submitted early will move to the front of the line — while others could wait months or even years. At Netzer Krautter Law Firm P.C. we’re already helping clients in Montana gather their court documents so that they are one step closer to file their § 925(c) applications once the process opens. Who May Qualify for Federal Gun Rights Restoration You may be eligible to apply under § 925(c) if: You have a federal or state conviction that prohibits you from possessing firearms; You have completed all terms of your sentence, including probation or parole; Your conviction has not been expunged or pardoned; and You can show rehabilitation and a law-abiding life since your conviction. Even if your conviction is decades old, this may be your best opportunity to restore your gun rights under federal law. Who the Proposed Rule Presumes Will Still not be Eligible for Restoration of Gun Rights. The proposed rule states that those individuals who are presumptively disqualified are, felons convicted of crimes that are particularly linked with dangerous or violent conduct are unlikely to be able to demonstrate that relief from disabilities is in the public interest. The list of presumptively disqualifying violent crimes is drawn in large part from the definitions of “crime of violence” in the Federal Firearms Act, ch. 850, sec. 1(6), 52 Stat. 1250, and the United States Sentencing Guidelines, U.S.S.G. 4B1.2(a)(2). The list also includes other crimes closely associated with dangerousness, such as threatening or stalking offenses and certain firearm-related offenses that are most often associated with violence or dangerousness. Furthermore, those presumptively disqualified are, “those who have been convicted of any felony sex offense” as well as “other applicants who cannot show that relief from federal firearm disabilities is consistent with public safety and the public interest, such as those currently serving any part of their sentence.” Other Time-Limit Presumptive Disqualifications The proposed rule states that, “The first category of offenders who would be subject to a time-limited presumptive disqualification is those convicted of drug-distribution crimes” and these would be presumptively disqualified for 10 years. Additionally, The rule similarly would presumptively disqualify from eligibility, absent extraordinary circumstances, any person who has either: (a) served any part of a sentence for a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33) and 27 CFR 478.11) within the last 10 years; or (b) engaged in behavior demonstrating continued propensity for violence at any time within the last 10 years following a conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Furthermore, “Finally, the Department has determined that it will presumptively disqualify from eligibility for relief any person who, within the last 5 years, has been convicted of or served any part of a sentence (including probation, parole, supervised release, or other supervision) for any other offense under state or federal law punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(20)).” How Can the Attorneys at Netzer Krautter Law Firm, P.C. Help Clients Navigate the 925(c) Program Application? The proposed § 925(c) program rule outlines an application that requires a detailed legal and factual presentation. Our attorneys can assist clients through the application process by: Collecting relevant court records, Drafting a persuasive personal narrative demonstrating rehabilitation, Obtaining character references from community members, Preparing a complete and compelling application package for ATF review, and Reviewing an application to ensure completeness prior to submission. If the proposed § 925(c) rule is finalized, the window to apply could open quickly — and tens of thousands but likely more could rush to file. Those who start preparing now will have a head start to submit their applications immediately, before the system becomes overwhelmed. Call our office today at 406-433-5511 to schedule a confidential consultation, whether that is in-person, by phone or online video.
By Joel Krautter January 12, 2026
As we begin 2026, it’s the perfect time to make sure you — and your loved ones — are truly protected if involved in an unexpected motor vehicle crash. While liability car insurance is required in Montana, there are still many drivers on the roadway who either lack insurance altogether, or are carrying only minimal coverage. Minimum coverage in Montana mandated by law is $25,000 per person bodily injury, $50,000 per accident bodily injury and $20,000 property damage. What is Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Coverage? Uninsured Motorist (UM) Coverage is coverage that protects you if you're involved in an accident with a driver who has no insurance. A report from the Insurance Information Institute estimates that over 15% of drivers on the road in 2023 were uninsured. UM coverage protects you if the other driver has no insurance, or flees the scene (hit-and-run). Without UM, you may end up responsible for your own medical bills, lost wages, and vehicle repairs. Underinsured Motorist (UIM) Coverage protects you if you're involved in an accident with a driver who has insurance, but their coverage limits are insufficient to cover your losses. In 2026, a minimum $25,000 for bodily injury coverage won’t go that far in a serious crash between hospital bills, long-term treatment, lost wages, or permanent impairment — making that amount woefully insufficient. UIM coverage an fill the gap between what the at-fault driver’s insurer pays and what you actually need. UM/UIM — Often an Affordable Safety Net Insurance industry data suggests that adding UM or UIM coverage generally adds only a modest amount to an auto policy — typically around 10% or less of your combined premium — yet provides a significant layer of financial protection. For most Montana drivers, that small extra cost is a worthwhile investment given the risk of being hit by an uninsured or underinsured motorist. What Can You Do Today to Protect Yourself? Review your auto policy now and confirm whether you have UM and/or UIM coverage so you’re not surprised when you need it. If you don’t have UM/UIM coverage — or if you are unsure — contact your insurance agent and find out about adding UM/UIM coverage. Consider raising your own insurance coverage limits beyond the bare minimum. Medical costs, rehabilitation, lost wages, and long-term disability easily exceed minimal liability thresholds. If you or a loved one is injured in a crash — even if the other driver was uninsured or underinsured — contact experienced legal representation before discussing the case with insurers. Final Thought Unfortunately, a car accident can happen to anyone — no matter how careful you are. Having uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage ensures that if the worst happens, you are not left bearing the full financial burden alone. Start 2026 by checking your auto insurance coverage today — and securing your financial safety net for tomorrow. If you have questions about UM/UIM coverage, what to do after a crash, or your rights under Montana law, feel free to reach out to us for a free consultation at 406-433-5511.
By James Reavis February 29, 2024
1. The 30-Day Rule:
By Joel Krautter January 18, 2024
It’s a New Year and here at Netzer, Krautter & Brown, P.C. we decided to start a monthly blog for our law firm, with each attorney sharing some legal insights from their experiences. Here are some common legal mistakes that can prove to be both frustrating and expensive. 1. The business deal or venture that doesn’t have anything in writing or uses some form found on the internet. This situation usually starts with two or more people seeing a business opportunity and deciding they’re going to go into business together or do a business transaction. Someone usually asserts “we don’t need lawyers to complicate this” and either finds some random form off the internet that is missing important legal language or they proceed with a handshake agreement and nothing in writing because each side says they’ll be fair to the other side. For a few weeks, months, or maybe even years everything goes well. Then something unexpected happens and there’s a falling out. Maybe it’s a disagreement about the payment arrangement, a disagreement about management, or knowing who’s responsible for a cost or obligation. Maybe someone can’t get the financing they thought they could. Or parties have different recollections of what they originally agreed to in the first place. If not resolved between the parties, it probably means everyone gets their own attorney and ends up paying expensive legal fees to sort through what could have been a preventable mess if there had been a written agreement. THE FIX: To avoid a potential legal headache, get an attorney involved in your business idea or transaction from the very beginning. They’ll know how to best protect your interests from the worst-case scenario or unanticipated situations. 2. Signing a settlement release with an insurance company without first talking to an attorney. This situation usually happens when a person has been injured in an accident. The insurance company for the person or company who caused the injury offers some early minimal payment of medical bills and property damage in exchange for the person signing a full release of all claims, damages and injuries—even injuries that might not be apparent until well after the accident. If a person signs that release and takes the money, they’ve given up their rights. Once that release is signed, it doesn’t matter that they may not have fully known the extent of their injuries or still be treating, with surgeries, physical therapy, etc, and have additional expenses that should have been compensated. THE FIX: Contact a personal injury attorney who has experience dealing with insurance companies for a consultation right after an accident and before signing any release, who will be able to advise you how to best protect your rights and if it makes sense to settle your claim. They will likely be able to get you a better resolution than if you sign your rights away and take the initial settlement.