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.
Why This Matters
Waiting period laws are often sold as “common sense,” but this case exposes the reality: they punish responsible, law-abiding citizens without advancing public safety.
Both plaintiffs passed background checks. Yet the state still forced them to wait—delaying their ability to exercise a fundamental constitutional right. The Tenth Circuit made clear that this kind of blanket delay does not survive constitutional scrutiny, and today’s injunction ensures the state can’t keep enforcing it while litigation continues.
For people facing credible threats to their safety, or who simply want to exercise their rights without government obstruction, waiting periods aren’t harmless—they’re dangerous.
The Fight Isn’t Over—But This Is a Big Step Forward
This injunction is an important victory, but it’s not the final word. Mountain States Legal Foundation will continue pressing the case to ensure that New Mexico’s unconstitutional waiting period law is permanently invalidated, not just paused.
Thanks to supporters like you, we’re able to take these fights to court—and win.
Stay tuned. The Constitution is winning.
