New Mexico Keeps Enforcing a Gun Wait Courts Struck Down
The National Rifle Association and the National Shooting Sports Foundation filed another federal lawsuit against New Mexico in late October 2026. The target is the state’s seven-day waiting period on firearm transfers, which applies even after a buyer clears the federal background check. The case, NSSF v. Torrez, names Attorney General Raúl Torrez as the defendant. The plaintiffs argue that the state keeps enforcing the law even after the Tenth Circuit held it unconstitutional in Ortega v. Grisham. New Mexico says that ruling protects only the two individual plaintiffs in that case. This new suit asks a federal court to strike HB129 again, this time for sales to anyone who passes the background check.
Key Details
The filing puts a specific set of facts on the record. Here is what the complaint and accompanying statements establish:
- Challenged law: HB129, New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period for firearm transfers after a passed background check.
- Court and case: NSSF v. Torrez, a new challenge that follows the earlier Ortega v. Grisham case in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.
- Prior ruling: The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held the waiting period violates the Second Amendment. The state reads that holding as applying only to the two named plaintiffs.
- Plaintiffs: The NRA, NSSF, Second Amendment Foundation, New Mexico Firearms Industry Association, New Mexico Shooting Sports Association, Calibers Shooting Sports Center, Omni Tactical USA, Right to Bear Arms, and NRA member Peter Hackett.
- Relief sought: A new declaration that HB129 is unconstitutional for background-checked sales, plus an injunction barring enforcement against the plaintiffs, their customers, and their members.
- Officials named: Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and Attorney General Raúl Torrez, both accused of continuing to enforce the law.
- NSSF position: Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane called the enforcement unconstitutional and said NSSF expects to win in court.
- SAF position: Executive Director Adam Kraut said officials openly saying they will keep enforcing the law is “incredibly concerning.”
Background
New Mexico’s waiting period is not a new fight. HB129 imposed a seven-day delay on firearm sales that already cleared the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Gun-rights groups argued from the start that the delay adds nothing to a check that already screens for prohibited buyers. The NRA and NSSF then brought Ortega v. Grisham with the Mountain State Legal Foundation in federal court. That case reached the Tenth Circuit, which ruled that the waiting period violates the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) changed the analysis. Under Bruen, the government must show that a challenged regulation matches the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The burden sits with the state, not with the gun owner. Since Bruen, courts across the country have been testing waiting periods and similar delays against that historical standard. The plaintiffs now say that a published appellate holding should bind the state across the board, not just for two people. New Mexico disagrees, and it has kept the law on the books and enforced it.
Why It Matters for Gun Owners
This lawsuit touches anyone who buys a firearm in New Mexico. A private buyer, a dealer, and a gun shop’s customers all face the same seven-day clock on background-checked transfers. Dealers feel it first. A buyer who passes the NICS check on Monday may not walk out with the gun until the following week. That gap costs stores sales, and some buyers walk away before the wait ends.
If you live in New Mexico or plan to buy there, don’t assume the Tenth Circuit ruling made the wait disappear. The state still enforces the law against people who are not named plaintiffs in Ortega. Ask your dealer how they handle transfers before you pay a deposit, and get the dates in writing. Keep your Form 4473 paperwork, your receipts, and your NICS approval details. If the courts side with the plaintiffs, you will want that documentation to show when your transfer was delayed and why. Watch the docket in NSSF v. Torrez, and consider joining an organization that is paying for this litigation if you want a voice in it.
DownRange Analysis
The state’s position is weak under Bruen. A background check already exists and already runs for each sale. The state has to show a historical analogue to a seven-day hold on a lawful purchase. Gun owners have heard the argument that a waiting period cools tempers. That is a policy claim, not a history claim, and Bruen does not accept policy claims as a substitute for tradition. The Tenth Circuit’s holding is a strong foundation for this suit.
The real problem is the state’s refusal to treat an appellate ruling as binding statewide. If New Mexico can read a Second Amendment holding as protecting only two people, then every new plaintiff must litigate from scratch. That is the strategy the plaintiffs are fighting, and it is why this complaint asks for relief covering customers and members. Gun owners should back that approach. Today, do three things: check whether your dealer applies the seven-day hold, keep your transfer records, and follow the case. A court order matters only if someone enforces it, and this case is about making sure the next ruling gets respected.
