New Mexico’s Gun Waiting Period Law Struck Down: Implications and Reactions

Background on the Waiting Period Law

In early 2024, New Mexico implemented the Waiting Period Act, which mandated a seven-day waiting period for most firearm purchases. This legislation aimed to mitigate impulsive gun violence and suicides amid rising gun-related incidents across the state. The law was signed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and included exceptions for certain groups such as concealed carry permit holders and law enforcement personnel.

Legal Proceedings and Court Rulings

The law’s constitutionality was challenged shortly after its enactment, leading to a lawsuit by plaintiffs including Samuel Ortega, represented by the National Rifle Association (NRA). Although U.S. District Judge James Browning initially upheld the law, a significant turn occurred on August 19, 2025, when a three-judge panel from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it unconstitutional, citing Second Amendment concerns.

Following this ruling, the state sought an en banc rehearing, which was denied on December 22, 2025. The decision has raised questions about the future of similar firearm regulations in New Mexico and potentially across the 10th Circuit, which encompasses several states including Colorado and Oklahoma.

Key Arguments from the Court

The 10th Circuit’s ruling highlighted that the waiting period imposed a burden on the constitutional right to acquire firearms, a point underscored by Judge Timothy Tymkovich. The dissenting judges, including Richard E.N. Federico, contended that the law was a reasonable approach to enhancing public safety by reducing impulsive purchases. They argued that the ruling disregards critical public safety considerations surrounding firearms regulation.

Reactions to the Decision

Governor Lujan Grisham expressed her disappointment with the ruling, emphasizing the potential risks to public safety and the importance of the waiting period in preventing impulsive acts of violence. The NRA lauded the decision as a significant victory for Second Amendment rights, suggesting it could have broader implications for firearm regulations nationwide.

As the state evaluates its options, the dissenting opinions in the court have raised concerns about the consistency of firearm laws across the circuit, particularly in light of previous rulings that have upheld such regulations, including Colorado’s age restrictions on firearm purchases. This conflict could complicate future legal interpretations and enforcement of gun laws throughout the region.

Broader Implications for Gun Regulations

This ruling marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over gun control in the United States, especially within the 10th Circuit. As the first instance of the 10th Circuit invalidating a firearm law under the Second Amendment, it sets a precedent that may influence other jurisdictions. Legal experts suggest that this case could potentially lead to a review by the U.S. Supreme Court, especially considering its implications for similar laws in other states.

For now, the future of waiting periods in firearm purchases remains uncertain, as stakeholders from both sides of the debate prepare for what could be a lengthy legal battle ahead.