By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
When news agencies reported plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit challenging Maine’s 72-hour “waiting period” on constitutional grounds had petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review, a board member of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition told WMTW News, “There’s nothing in the Second Amendment that says the right is an immediate right.”
The remark came from Margaret Groban, who insisted the three-day waiting period saves lives. She reportedly also posited that a lot of people “go and buy guns in a very impulsive way,” and it could result in tragedy.
However, David Trahan, executive director of the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, reportedly countered, “That is not how you exercise freedoms. If I pass all the government regulations, I should be able to exercise my right to own a firearm.”
News Center Maine quotes another anti-gunner, Nicole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, asserting, “There’s a reason why 72-hour waiting period laws are commonly referred to as ‘cooling off periods’ — because in a situation where someone is trying to buy a gun urgently, they probably need help from either law enforcement or a mental health care provider.In fact, in the last few months alone our waiting period law helped prevent two potential suicides, according to reports from the state Department of Public Safety.”
The story referred to two cases involving women who had tried to commit suicide but were unable to buy guns because of the waiting period.
But what other constitutionally-protected rights are delayed? Fourth Amendment? Fifth Amendment? Sixth Amendment?
If a legislature voted to delay the exercise of the First Amendment, how loudly would the publishers of the New York Times and Washington Post protest, and how swiftly would they sue? What if they had to wait to sue?
It is only the Second Amendment which appears to need a “cooling off” period before it may be exercised. At least one court says otherwise.
Earlier this month, a three-judge panel of the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision, struck down New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period for taking possession of a purchased firearm, noting in its 38-page ruling, “As a general matter, the government cannot delay the exercise of a right because it believes that citizens might misuse it without sufficient time to reflect beforehand.”
The case is known as Ortega v. Grisham, brought by the National Rifle Association and Mountain States Legal Foundation for plaintiffs Samuel Ortega and Rebecca Scott in 2024.
Writing for the majority, Judge Timothy Tymkovich, a George W. Bush appointee, stated, “Cooling-off periods infringe on the Second Amendment by preventing the lawful acquisition of firearms. Cooling off periods do not fit into any historically grounded exceptions to the right to keep and bear arms, and burden conduct within the Second Amendment’s scope.”
In the Maine case, the appeal is reportedly being supported by the National Shooting Sports Foundation after the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in April.
The Supreme Court returns in October following its traditional summer recess.
