A group of Republicans in the U.S. House are urging for the removal of controversial "red flag law" provisions from a "must-pass" defense spending bill. 

The language, specifically contained in Sec. 529 of the House's version of the mammoth National Defense Authorization Act, would allow a military court order to "restrain a person from possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm." The order could be issued on an ex parte basis, where the subject only finds out about the order when the police knock on their door. Now that the bill has passed the chamber and has drawn attention, some who voted for it specifically want the gun seizure language scrubbed. 

"My vote in support of the NDAA was to reject Biden’s efforts to gut our military, to ensure we’re able to stand up to Russia and China, and to begin investigations into the Biden Administration’s disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, not to remove our military’s Second Amendment rights," said U.S. Rep. Stephanie Bice, R-OK. "I will fight to ensure this provision is stripped from the final version of the NDAA."

Bice joined 161 other lawmakers Wednesday in penning a letter to the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees seeking the removal of Sec. 529. 

"We are greatly concerned that if enacted, Sec. 529 would violate the Second Amendment rights of our nation’s brave servicemembers by allowing military judges and magistrates to issue military court gun confiscation orders," says the letter. "Even more concerning, under this provision, such an order could be issued by a military court on an ex parte basis – meaning the order could be issued without the servicemember even being present in court to defend themselves. We believe this is a serious breach of due process that demands your full attention." 

Banner image: WWII U.S. military small arms (Photo: Chris Eger/Guns.com) 

revolver barrel loading graphic