Gun Law SHOCK—Waiting Periods Just Got Crushed

"Gun Law" book and gavel on wooden desk.

A federal court has struck down New Mexico’s seven-day gun purchase waiting period, delivering a critical victory for Second Amendment advocates and setting a precedent that could unravel similar restrictions nationwide.

Quick Take

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period for gun purchases is likely unconstitutional.
This marks one of the first major federal appellate decisions to reject waiting periods after the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision.
The court emphasized that immediate firearm possession is integral to Second Amendment rights and not subject to modern “cooling off” regulations.
The ruling blocks enforcement of the law and could impact similar statutes in multiple states, energizing constitutional and gun rights debates.

Federal Appeals Court Rejects New Mexico’s Waiting Period Law

On August 19, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled that New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period for firearm purchases violates constitutional protections, halting its enforcement and signaling a significant shift in how courts evaluate gun control measures. The law, enacted in May 2024, required buyers to wait seven days after passing a background check before taking possession of a firearm. The court found that this delay infringes on the right to bear arms, especially when no historical precedent supports such a restriction.

The court’s majority opinion declared that waiting periods are a modern innovation, unsupported by the historical tradition that the Second Amendment demands. This case, Ortega v. Grisham, was brought by the National Rifle Association and Mountain States Legal Foundation, who argued that the law imposed an unconstitutional burden on law-abiding citizens. The decision is notable for directly applying the Supreme Court’s Bruen standard, which requires modern gun regulations to align with the nation’s historical legal tradition, and positions the right to immediate firearm possession as fundamental.

Background and Legal Context: Bruen’s Influence and Precedents

The roots of this legal battle trace back to the Supreme Court’s 2022 New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen decision, which dramatically raised the bar for upholding gun restrictions. The Bruen standard mandates that any firearm regulation must be consistent with historical practices from the time of the Constitution’s framing. New Mexico’s law, introduced in 2024 as a supposed safeguard against impulsive violence and loopholes in federal background checks, drew immediate opposition from gun rights groups. They argued it lacked any founding-era precedent, making it vulnerable under Bruen.

Historically, the Second Amendment has protected the right to keep and bear arms, with the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) confirming that this right includes self-defense in the home. Waiting periods—first appearing nationwide in the late 20th century—were designed as public safety measures, but have come under renewed scrutiny post-Bruen. The 10th Circuit’s ruling marks a turning point, as it is among the first federal appellate courts to explicitly deem such waiting periods unconstitutional, potentially setting the stage for broader challenges across the country.

Stakeholders, Political Implications, and Next Steps

The outcome is a triumph for the NRA and allied organizations, who have long argued that waiting periods serve only to delay the rights of law-abiding citizens while doing little to stop crime. New Mexico’s Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, who championed the law, contended it would reduce gun violence and prevent impulsive acts. The court’s decision, authored by Judge Timothy Tymkovich, rejected those arguments, emphasizing that public safety cannot justify new restrictions unless they are grounded in historical precedent.

The decision’s effects may ripple across the 10th Circuit, which covers Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Other states with similar statutes could see their laws challenged or struck down. In the short term, New Mexico gun buyers and dealers are no longer subject to the seven-day delay. For Second Amendment defenders, this ruling is a powerful affirmation of constitutional rights—and a clear warning to lawmakers considering new gun restrictions unsupported by tradition.

Gun control advocates warn that striking down waiting periods could undermine efforts to reduce suicide and impulsive violence, arguing that even brief delays can save lives. However, the court’s strict adherence to historical standards leaves little room for such modern rationales. As legal scholars note, this decision underscores the growing difficulty states face in defending contemporary gun safety measures. The case now returns to the lower court for further action, but enforcement of the waiting period remains blocked. Ultimately, this ruling strengthens the legal foundation for constitutional carry and immediate firearm possession, energizing debate over the limits of government power and the primacy of the Second Amendment.