A major gun rights victory emerged this week as the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down New Mexico’s controversial seven-day waiting period for firearm purchases. In a 2-1 decision, the panel ruled that the law likely violated the Second Amendment and could not withstand constitutional scrutiny.

The waiting period, enacted by Democrats last year, forced citizens to wait a full week before obtaining a firearm. Advocates claimed it was a safety measure designed to give authorities more time to complete background checks and to prevent impulsive acts of violence or suicide. But critics called it an unconstitutional delay that left vulnerable people defenseless.

Judge Timothy Tymkovich, writing for the majority, was clear that so-called “cooling-off periods” had no basis in America’s history or legal tradition. “Cooling-off periods do not fit into any historically grounded exceptions to the right to keep and bear arms, and burden conduct within the Second Amendment’s scope,” he wrote. The court’s decision halts the law while litigation continues.

The ruling comes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 Bruen decision, which established a new test requiring gun regulations to be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The plaintiffs, represented by the Mountain States Legal Foundation and the National Rifle Association, argued successfully that no such tradition existed for arbitrary waiting periods.

Michael McCoy of the Mountain States Legal Foundation praised the decision, saying the court recognized that “there was no analogous law from that era that would support the modern day law at issue.” For now, New Mexicans are free to purchase firearms immediately after passing a background check.

The NRA also welcomed the ruling, with its Institute for Legislative Action’s director, John Commerford, calling it a key step in dismantling unconstitutional gun control measures across the country.

Not everyone agreed. Judge Scott Matheson dissented, arguing that the waiting period was merely a condition on the commercial sale of arms and did not inherently undermine Second Amendment protections. Meanwhile, Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham slammed the ruling, claiming it would put lives at risk. “Waiting periods prevent impulsive acts of violence and suicide, giving people time to reassess their emotions during moments of crisis,” she said, calling the law “carefully crafted” to reduce gun violence.

Grisham has made gun control a cornerstone of her administration since taking office in 2019, signing red flag laws, restricting firearms near polling places, and even temporarily suspending gun rights in public areas of Albuquerque last year. Her push has repeatedly sparked lawsuits and fierce backlash from Second Amendment advocates.

The case now heads back to a lower court, but legal experts say the appeals court’s ruling could have broader consequences. Other blue states such as California, Hawaii, and Illinois have similar waiting period laws that could now face fresh challenges under the Bruen precedent.

The battle is far from over. New Mexico officials could seek review from the full 10th Circuit or appeal directly to the Supreme Court. But for now, the ruling represents a major blow to gun control advocates and a clear win for those who argue the Constitution protects the right to immediate self-defense.

With the 2026 midterm elections looming and gun rights once again front and center in national debates, this decision may set the tone for future fights over how far states can go in restricting the Second Amendment.