Estimated reading time: 2 minutes
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals just dropped a major ruling for gun owners, striking down New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period on firearm purchases.
The court held that the law burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment and doesn’t line up with any historically recognized exceptions.
According to the opinion, cooling-off periods may have modern policy goals, but they don’t fit the historical framework the Supreme Court requires.
That made the law unconstitutional on its face. The decision came in an NSSF-backed case, and it marks another pushback against states attempting to add hurdles between citizens and their right to keep and bear arms.
What It Means for Retailers
The NSSF noted that this ruling doesn’t take effect immediately. By rule, the earliest the mandate can issue is 21 days from the decision. New Mexico could also seek an en banc rehearing, which would delay things further.
SEE ALSO: A New Gun for the Old West: Henry Golden Boy Revolver Review
Once the mandate drops, the ruling effectively allows firearm transfers after a “proceed” response from the NICS background check system, without the waiting period. However, individuals with a “delayed” NICS response are still in a gray area.
The court left it to the lower court to sort out how an injunction will apply in those cases. Until that’s clarified, NSSF advises FFLs to continue following the law for delayed responses.
The Bigger Picture
This case underscores the ongoing legal battle over waiting periods. For gun owners, especially in rural areas or for those facing immediate threats, waiting days before taking possession of a firearm can mean the difference between life and death.
The Tenth Circuit’s ruling reinforces that the Second Amendment protects not just ownership, but timely access.
For now, the industry is watching closely. Retailers and gun owners should keep an eye on updates, since New Mexico officials may try to push back through the courts.
But make no mistake—this decision is a significant win for Second Amendment rights in the Tenth Circuit.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
So when will residents of the state sue for damaged for deprivation of rights under color of law? Afterall democrats will keep infringing on our rights if there are no consequences for doing so.
What will this mean for other states with waiting periods?
Probably will not apply to other states as this is a New Mexico ruling. However, it will put other states on notice as this ruling can be cited by similar lawsuits in other states. Until SCOTUS rules to set precedence in alignment with the Constitution, expect other states to have waiting periods. Also, expect Grisham and her Dems in the NM legislature to request an en banc hearing to try to overturn this ruling, or just to delay the inevitable.