FEDERAL COURT RULES ON NEW MEXICO’S SEVEN-DAY WAITING PERIOD

A New Mexico Federal Court made a decision on the 7-day waiting period that is confusing at best and is a clear violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the the U.S. Constitution at worst. 

The ruling states that two plaintiffs don't have to be subjected to the waiting period while other New Mexico citizens still are subject to the law. This means we all have to wait for our 2A rights while the plaintiffs get theirs by this decision. Ridiculous!

Here's a press release from the Mountain States Legal Foundation:

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

FEDERAL COURT RULES ON NEW MEXICO’S SEVEN-DAY WAITING PERIOD

Federal court enjoins enforcement of New Mexico’s firearms waiting period law for only the two named plaintiffs in Ortega v. Grisham, but allows government to delay the exercise of Second Amendment rights for all other citizens of New Mexico 

LAKEWOOD, Colo. (August 28, 2026) — Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF) and its Center to Keep & Bear Arms is disappointed to announce a decision in Ortega v. Grisham that leaves New Mexico’s seven-day firearm waiting period largely in place. 

New Mexico’s waiting-period law requires nearly every firearm purchaser to wait seven days before taking possession of a firearm—even after completing the required background check. MSLF represents New Mexico residents Samuel Ortega and Rebecca Scott, who challenged the law as a violation of their Second Amendment rights.  

The case began in May 2024, when MSLF filed a complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction on behalf of Ortega and Scott.  Two months later, U.S. District Court Judge James O. Browning denied the request, finding that the plaintiffs had not established that the waiting period law was unconstitutional. MSLF appealed that decision. 

In August 2025, the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a significant ruling in the case. The court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to acquire firearms and concluded that New Mexico had failed to demonstrate a historical tradition supporting its seven-day waiting period law. The Tenth Circuit sent the case back to the district court in Albuquerque for further proceedings.  

Yesterday, Judge Browning issued a final judgment in the case. Although the judge stated that he continued to believe that the waiting period law was constitutional, he acknowledged that he was “bound by the Tenth Circuit’s decision and the law of the case.” As a result, he permanently prohibited New Mexico from enforcing the waiting-period law against Ortega and Scott. 

So, while this ruling provides a total victory for our clients, it appears to leave millions of other law-abiding New Mexicans seemingly still subject to the same seven-day waiting period.  

For that reason, MSLF strongly disagrees with the court’s watered-down ruling. 

“Unfortunately, Judge Browning decided to take King Solomon up on his ‘great’ idea to split the baby. Big mistake,” said Michael McCoy, Director of MSLF’s Center to Keep and Bear Arms. “What a mess this is going to cause! All Judge Browning’s decision is going to do is create mass confusion among individual citizens and gun store owners in New Mexico over the status of the law. The decision prevents the state from enforcing the waiting period law against our two named plaintiffs, but leaves open the ability of the state to enforce the law against the other 2.12 million people who live in New Mexico. Will each of them need to bring their own individual lawsuits to acquire a similar injunction? Ridiculous! In trying to reach some sort of middle ground, the district court has failed to do what the 10th Circuit made clear needed to be done … declare New Mexico’s waiting period law unconstitutional and permanently enjoin enforcement of it except as to those individuals whose background checks have not yet cleared.” 

MSLF strongly disagrees with the court’s decision. Except for our two named plaintiffs, New Mexico may continue to impose an arbitrary seven-day delay on law-abiding citizens exercising their constitutional right—even after they have completed the required background check. The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms; it does not give the government permission to decide when that right may be exercised. 

While this decision is not the clear and complete victory we were hoping for, it is not the end of the fight. MSLF will continue defending the Second Amendment and will consider every available avenue to ensure that the constitutional rights of law-abiding New Mexicans are fully protected. 

###

A Major Win For the Second Amendment In New Mexico

A major win for the Second Amendment in New Mexico!

A district court decreed that Constitutional rights cannot be put on hold. This is in regard to the 7-day waiting period case in which the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law is unconstitutional.

Mountain States Legal Foundation reported:

The district court in New Mexico delivered a clear message to New Mexico politicians: Constitutional rights cannot be put on hold. 

In Ortega v. Grisham, a U.S. district court issued a preliminary injunction stopping the State of New Mexico from enforcing its firearm waiting period law against two law-abiding citizens—effective immediately. 

This ruling follows an important decision from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which determined that New Mexico’s Waiting Period Act is unconstitutional as applied to individuals who have already passed a background check. The district court’s order puts that constitutional ruling into action. 

What the Court Ordered 

The injunction blocks the Governor, the Attorney General, and all state officials from enforcing the waiting period law against plaintiffs Samuel Ortega and Rebecca Scott. It remains in effect while the case continues through final resolution. 

This can be seen as a major rebuke against "Grishy the Clown" and her Democrat lackeys in the legislature.

To read more, go here. 

NM 7-Day Gun Waiting Period Remains On Hold

The seven-day waiting period for gun purchases enacted by the New Mexico Democrats has been effectively ruled unconstitutional by the 10th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals.

A panel of the court ruled the law was unconstitutional last summer but was sent to the full court. But they decided not to re-hear the case. 

From KOB 4:

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – The seven-day waiting period for buying a gun in New Mexico remains on hold due to a Federal Court of Appeals decision.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, which oversees New Mexico, upheld a ruling from last summer after two individuals and the National Rifle Association challenged the waiting period law. The law, passed by state legislators last year, was found to violate the Second Amendment.

This is definitely a victory for Second Amendment backers in New Mexico.

To read more, go here. 

Appeals Court Halts New Mexico's Gun Purchase Waiting Period

Above, a card I picked up last year at Loeffler's Guns Etc. in Grants. 

Last year, I bought a Winchester Model 12 shotgun just before the new New Mexico law forcing a 7-day waiting period on gun purchases.

The law went into effect May 15, 2024.

Lawsuits then ensued challenging the constitutionality of the law.

Yesterday, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the plaintiffs against the law.

The Santa Fe New Mexican reported:

A federal appellate court Tuesday landed a heavy blow against a New Mexico law requiring a seven-day waiting period for firearms purchases.

The ruling, which questions the constitutionality of the waiting period, could affect similar laws in place in states across the country.

Tuesday’s ruling means New Mexico’s gun purchase waiting period — passed into law last year — will be put on hold until the legal challenge by two state residents is resolved in a lower federal court. But the ruling also provides a signal of the how the court is likely to rule on the law.

Judges from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver reversed a lower court decision to deny a injunction against New Mexico’s Waiting Period Act, which requires a seven-day “cooling-off period” for purchases of guns throughout the state, with some exceptions for concealed carry permit-holders and law enforcement officers and sales between immediate family members.

An order issued by the appellate court Tuesday states the law is “likely an unconstitutional burden on the Second Amendment rights of its citizens.”

This is definitely great news for gun owners in New Mexico and, possibly, around the country.

To read more, go here. 

$15/Hour Minimum Wage Hurting Colorado Rafting Outfitters

Above, yours truly rafting the Snake River near Jackson, Wyoming in 2019.

Another factor of inflation these days (that doesn't get as much coverage as it should) is the raising of minimum wages in different states. 

Everyone is aware of the high prices at fast food restaurants due to higher minimum wages, but there are some businesses that are suffering which are not on anyone's radar.

One such business is the river rafting industry in Colorado. Colorado is a blue state dominated by radical Democrats.

A Colorado rafting company recently lost a court battle over the state's $15.00/hour minimum wage.

MSN.com reported:

GRANITE, Colo. (KKTV) -A recent federal court ruling could increase the cost of rafting on the Arkansas River. Colorado river outfitters, including Arkansas Valley Adventures, have lost their legal fight to avoid paying state-mandated minimum wages to their raft guides.

The decision, handed down on April 30 by the federal court, upheld a $15 per hour minimum wage, following an appeal to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year.

The outfitters argued that the wage increase would escalate their operating costs, potentially leading to higher prices for customers and fewer available trips. The government contends that higher wages will boost worker productivity and improve service quality.

“You know, we’re going to pay you twice as much but guess what, we don’t have any work. It wouldn’t help us. We didn’t want that. We wanted an exemption. We wanted to understand our situation, and that just didn’t happen,” said Arkansas Valley Adventures owner Duke Bradford.

A $15.00/hour minimum wage sounds lovely, but that won't do anyone any good if companies have to cut back or even go out of business. The river rafting industry is especially hurt since it is seasonal.

To read more, go here. 

Appeals Court: Cowboys for Trump A Political Committee

Above, the Cowboy for Trump in Grants, New Mexico in November 2019. Photo by Armand Vaquer.

The 10th District U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against the Cowboys for Trump group and upheld a lower court ruling that it was a political organization and should have registered.

I attended one Cowboys for Trump event in Grants, New Mexico, which was a caravan of horseback riders and assorted vehicles through town.

According to KRQE:

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — A federal appeals court has turned away a constitutional challenge by the support group Cowboys for Trump and co-founder Couy Griffin to New Mexico election laws and registration requirements for political groups.

In a written order obtained Wednesday, the Denver-based U.S. 10th District Court of Appeals declined to reverse a lower court ruling that upheld state registration requirements for Cowboys for Trump as a political organization.

Griffin, a Republican county commissioner from Tularosa in southern New Mexico, sued New Mexico Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver in 2020 in response to mounting pressure on Cowboys for Trump to register as a political committee in New Mexico, and Griffin’s concerns that might lead to other disclosure requirements about contributions and spending.

Chief Judge Timothy Tymkovich of the 10th Circuit cited several shortcomings in Griffin’s legal appeal, while declining to reverse the lower court’s dismissal.

If anything, the Cowboys for Trump should have registered as a political organization just to avoid wasting time and resources fighting the Secretary of State. It would be worth registering just to keep her off their backs, in my view.

To read more, go here.