FEDERAL JUDGE TEMPORARILY BLOCKS MAINE’S NEW GUN SALE WAITING PERIOD

February 13, 2025

PORTLAND, Maine – A federal judge has temporarily halted Maine’s newly enacted three-day waiting period for firearm purchases, siding with gun rights advocates who argue the law is unconstitutional.

Chief U.S. District Judge Lance Walker issued the injunction Thursday, granting relief to plaintiffs who claimed the 72-hour waiting period violated the Second Amendment. In his 17-page ruling, Walker stated that acquiring a firearm is an essential step in exercising the right to bear arms and dismissed contrary interpretations as requiring “the type of interpretative jiu-jitsu that would make Kafka blush.”

Walker acknowledged the public interest in gun control measures but ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, citing their likelihood of success in the legal challenge. “Given that Plaintiffs have established a likelihood of success and the existence of irreparable injury, I find that the balance of equities favors them as well,” Walker wrote.

BACKGROUND ON THE WAITING PERIOD LAW

The waiting period law was passed by Maine lawmakers last year as part of broader gun reform efforts following the October 2023 mass shooting in Lewiston, which left 18 people dead and more than a dozen injured. The law took effect without the signature of Governor Janet Mills, who faced pressure from both gun rights supporters and safety advocates.

Supporters of the waiting period argued that the measure would help reduce firearm-related suicides by providing a “cooling-off” period before individuals could take possession of a gun. Critics, including gun rights groups, contended that the law placed an undue burden on law-abiding gun owners, hindered firearm sales, and jeopardized out-of-state hunting tourism.

Under the law, gun sellers who violated the waiting period faced fines ranging from $200 to $500 for a first offense and up to $1,000 for subsequent violations.

DIVIDED REACTIONS TO THE RULING

The ruling was met with sharp criticism from gun control advocates. Nacole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, expressed disappointment and called for an appeal. “We’re deeply troubled by the decision of a Trump-appointed judge to roll back Maine’s gun safety laws,” Palmer said. She emphasized that similar waiting periods have been upheld in other states, including some with even longer delays.

Meanwhile, gun rights advocates welcomed the injunction as a victory for the Second Amendment. Laura Whitcomb, president of Gun Owners of Maine, praised the ruling. “We couldn’t be more thrilled with Judge Walker’s decision,” she said in a statement. “This law does little to improve public safety and only denies the rights of responsible gun owners.”

WHAT’S NEXT?

The Maine Attorney General’s Office has not yet indicated whether it will appeal the ruling. If the case moves forward, it could have broader implications for waiting period laws across the country.

Currently, 12 other states and Washington, D.C., have some form of waiting period for gun purchases, according to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. The debate over Maine’s law is likely to continue as courts weigh constitutional arguments against public safety concerns.

The lawsuit challenging the waiting period was filed in November by a coalition of gun owners and businesses, including state Representative James White, who owns J. White Gunsmithing, and Andrea Beckwith, a self-defense instructor for domestic violence survivors. Their case is now set to proceed in federal court as the state considers its next move.

COMMENTARY:

The decision by Chief U.S. District Judge Lance Walker to block Maine’s unconstitutional three-day waiting period for gun purchases is a tremendous victory for the Second Amendment and law-abiding gun owners. This ruling upholds the fundamental right to keep and bear arms, rejecting an unnecessary and burdensome restriction that does nothing to enhance public safety. I could not be more thrilled to see a judge stand firmly against these blatant attempts to infringe upon constitutional freedoms.

The waiting period law was nothing more than a feel-good measure passed by politicians desperate to appear as if they were taking action in response to tragedy. Instead of addressing real issues like mental health, law enforcement failures, or the release of dangerous criminals back onto the streets, they chose to target the rights of responsible citizens. Judge Walker’s ruling sends a clear message that emotional policymaking cannot override the Constitution.

Perhaps the most absurd and offensive part of the arguments in favor of the three-day waiting period was their reliance on historical precedent—specifically, prejudicial laws used in the past. The fact that gun control advocates would try to justify modern restrictions by citing oppressive, racist, and unconstitutional laws from American history is both laughable and sickening. They are essentially saying that because governments have violated people’s rights before, they should be able to do it again.

This twisted logic is both morally and legally bankrupt. It is shocking to see gun control advocates, who often claim to stand against oppression, now using historical discrimination as an excuse to restrict gun rights. Instead of acknowledging past injustices and ensuring that all Americans can freely exercise their Second Amendment rights, they seek to use history as a tool to justify new forms of control.

Judge Walker rightly dismissed this line of reasoning. He recognized that acquiring a firearm is a necessary step in the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms. The waiting period law placed an arbitrary barrier between citizens and their constitutional rights, treating law-abiding gun owners as if they were criminals in need of state approval before exercising a fundamental liberty.

The ruling also highlights the broader issue of how gun control advocates manipulate history to fit their agenda. They conveniently ignore the fact that the very gun control laws they reference were used to disarm minorities and vulnerable populations, leaving them defenseless against both criminals and an overreaching government. If anything, history teaches us that restrictions on gun ownership lead to greater oppression, not safety.

Furthermore, this decision is a win for Maine’s economy, particularly small businesses that rely on firearm sales. Many gun shops would have faced serious financial harm due to the waiting period, especially those that serve out-of-state hunters who wouldn’t be able to complete their purchases during short visits. This law was an attack on both constitutional rights and the livelihoods of hardworking Americans.

Gun control groups like the Maine Gun Safety Coalition are predictably outraged, but their arguments continue to ring hollow. Their claim that this law would prevent suicides ignores the fact that people intent on self-harm have countless other means at their disposal. A three-day waiting period is not a magic solution—it is simply an excuse to make gun ownership more difficult, as part of a broader strategy to chip away at Second Amendment rights.

It is refreshing to see a judge acknowledge that public safety cannot be used as an excuse to infringe on constitutional rights. The entire purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect individuals from government overreach, even when that overreach is disguised as being in the “public interest.” Judge Walker recognized that the Second Amendment is not subject to a popularity contest or political whims.

This ruling also serves as a reminder that rights delayed are rights denied. If we allow government-imposed waiting periods on gun purchases, what stops them from imposing waiting periods on speech, religion, or other fundamental freedoms? The logic used to justify these restrictions is dangerous and could be applied to other constitutional rights in the future.

Gun owners in Maine should celebrate this victory, but also remain vigilant. The state’s attorney general may attempt to appeal this ruling, and gun control activists will not stop pushing their agenda. Every time they lose in court, they return with new strategies to undermine the Second Amendment through different means.

The fight for gun rights is far from over, but this decision is an important step in the right direction. It reaffirms that the Constitution means what it says and that the government cannot arbitrarily infringe on fundamental liberties. Every American, whether they own guns or not, should be grateful for this ruling because it upholds the broader principle of individual rights.

Gun rights advocates have long warned that waiting periods and other so-called “common-sense” measures are just stepping stones to more restrictive laws. This case proves that point. If we allow three-day waiting periods, what’s next? Ten days? Thirty days? A permit just to purchase ammunition? These laws are never about safety—they are about control.

Judge Walker’s ruling represents a rare moment of sanity in the fight over gun rights. It restores confidence that at least some members of the judiciary still respect the Constitution. We need more judges like Walker who are willing to stand up against political pressure and do what is right.

Ultimately, this decision is not just about Maine—it is about the entire country. If this waiting period law had been allowed to stand, it would have emboldened other states to impose similar or even more extreme restrictions. By striking it down, Walker has helped protect the rights of all Americans. I sincerely hope this ruling serves as a precedent to challenge and defeat similar unconstitutional laws nationwide.

ARTICLE:

https://www.pressherald.com/2025/02/13/federal-judge-pauses-maines-new-waiting-period-for-gun-sales/