In a landmark decision on August 20, 2025, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled New Mexicos seven-day waiting period for firearm purchases unconstitutional, delivering a major legal win for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and allied plaintiffs. The ruling immediately halts enforcement of the law and signals a broader shift in how courts evaluate firearm restrictions in the post-Bruen legal landscape. The case, Ortega v. Grisham, was filed in May 2024 by the NRA in partnership with the Mountain States Legal Foundation. Plaintiffs included New Mexico residents who argued that the waiting period endangered their ability to defend themselves, especially victims of domestic violence who might need firearms quickly. A district court initially upheld the law, rejecting a preliminary injunction request, but the appeals court reversed that decision this week. Judge Timothy Tymkovich, writing for the majority, ruled that the waiting period does not align with any historically grounded exception to the right to keep and bear arms. The opinion echoed the U.S. Supreme Courts 2022 New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen ruling, which requires that gun laws be consistent with the nations historical tradition of firearm regulation. Since no similar delays existed in early American law, the panel determined that New Mexicos measure imposed an unconstitutional burden. The law, signed by Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham in 2024, required buyers to wait seven days after purchasing firearms before taking possession. The measure exempted concealed carry permit holders, law enforcement, and immediate family transfers, but still applied broadly to most retail sales. Advocates claimed it would prevent impulsive acts of violence and suicide, with studies suggesting waiting periods can reduce firearm-related deaths. Governor Grisham blasted the ruling, calling it deeply disappointing and likely to cost lives. She noted that dissenting Judge Scott Matheson cited evidence showing the law could prevent approximately 37 deaths annually. The Governors office is now reviewing legal options, including potential appeals. The NRA celebrated the decision as a watershed moment. John Commerford, Executive Director of NRA-ILA, declared: This victory dismantles radical waiting period laws and reinforces that Americans do not need to justify their right to keep and bear arms with modern policy arguments. The Constitution already guarantees it. He further suggested the ruling could spur challenges to similar laws in states like California, Hawaii, and Illinois. Legal analysts see this as part of a national trend in which waiting periods, magazine limits, and other longstanding gun control tools are increasingly vulnerable under Bruens tradition-based standard. While public health advocates continue to press for such measures as common-sense safeguards, courts are requiring historical precedent, leaving legislatures with fewer options. For New Mexico gun owners, the immediate effect is significant: firearms can once again be purchased and taken home the same day, provided buyers pass federal background checks. Concealed carry permit holders, who were already exempt from the delay, now face no changesbut the broader public gains quicker access to firearms. Gun shops across the state welcomed the ruling, noting it simplifies transactions and boosts customer confidence. Critics argue that the decision prioritizes ideological purity over public safety. Advocates for stricter gun laws point to research showing waiting periods reduce suicides and crimes of passion. They fear the ruling will embolden other states to roll back similar restrictions, potentially increasing risks nationwide. The case will return to a lower court for final proceedings, but the injunction ensures that the law cannot be enforced in the meantime. Many observers expect the issue to ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court, where it could establish a binding national precedent on waiting periods.