The Supreme Court declined October 19 to take up Beckwith v. Frey, a challenge to Maine's 72-hour firearm purchase waiting period, leaving in place a First Circuit ruling that upheld the law and deepening an active disagreement between federal appeals courts over whether the Second Amendment protects the right to acquire a firearm without a state-imposed delay. AmmoLand first reported the denial.

Maine enacted the waiting period in 2024 in the wake of the Lewiston mass shooting, requiring a 72-hour gap between the completion of a firearm purchase and delivery of the firearm to the buyer. Challengers argued that a statutory delay on an enumerated constitutional right has no historical analogue in American tradition and is therefore indefensible under the framework the Supreme Court set out in Bruen. The First Circuit ruled against the challengers, upholding the law — a result that stands in direct conflict with the Tenth Circuit, which this year struck down New Mexico's seven-day waiting period on nearly identical constitutional grounds.

The NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation filed a joint amicus brief urging the Court to grant certiorari, and a coalition of 28 state attorneys general led by Montana's office backed the challengers at the circuit level. The petition to the Court argued that the widening circuit split made Supreme Court intervention necessary to establish a national standard on whether acquisition delays are constitutionally permissible. The Court denied without recorded explanation and without a noted dissent.

For gun owners in First Circuit states — Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico — the denial leaves waiting period laws on considerably firmer judicial footing than they are in the Tenth Circuit's jurisdiction. For the broader Second Amendment litigation landscape, the Court's silence carries real weight. The central question that Bruen raised but did not resolve is whether the right to keep and bear arms includes a near-term right to acquire firearms, and the Court has now declined a second opportunity to answer it directly.

The Tenth Circuit's ruling against New Mexico's seven-day waiting period remains the strongest appellate precedent for challengers. That ruling is subject to further litigation, including the possibility of en banc review, and its survival will determine how sharp the circuit conflict becomes going forward. Second Amendment organizations have signaled they will continue pressing waiting-period challenges in circuits that have not yet addressed the issue, with the goal of sharpening the conflict until the Court grants review.

What to watch: Maine's legislature has shown no indication it intends to revisit the waiting period, and the law remains in effect. The next significant development in this area will most likely come from the Tenth Circuit's handling of the New Mexico case or from a new challenge in a circuit where the constitutional question is still open.