A federal appeals court just issued one of the most significant Second Amendment rulings in recent memory — and it could shape how courts across the country handle gun regulations for years to come.
On April 3, 2026, the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — the same court that covers Massachusetts — upheld Maine’s 72-hour waiting period for firearm purchases in Beckwith v. Frey. The decision reversed a lower court that had blocked the law, and it offers a new roadmap for how courts might analyze gun control measures after the Supreme Court’s landmark Bruen decision.
Background: A Law Born From Tragedy
In October 2023, a gunman killed 18 people and wounded 13 others in Lewiston, Maine — the deadliest mass shooting in the state’s history. In response, Maine’s legislature passed several new firearms laws, including a requirement that gun sellers wait 72 hours after a purchase agreement before delivering a firearm to a buyer.
The law’s goal was straightforward: create a “cooling off” period to reduce impulsive purchases that lead to suicide or homicide. Legislators pointed to research suggesting that states with waiting period laws have seen significantly fewer firearm suicides and homicides than states without them.
A group of gun owners and firearms dealers sued almost immediately, arguing the law violated the Second Amendment. A federal district court agreed with them and blocked the law from taking effect. Maine’s Attorney General appealed, and the First Circuit took a hard look at the question.
The Legal Framework: What Is Bruen, and Why Does It Matter?
To understand the ruling, you need to know about New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a 2022 Supreme Court decision that changed how courts evaluate gun laws. Under Bruen, courts ask two questions:
- Does the law restrict conduct that the Second Amendment’s plain text covers — specifically, the right to “keep and bear arms“?
- If so, the government must show the law fits within the country’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.
Bruen made it harder for governments to defend gun regulations because they have to find historical parallels from the founding era. Many gun control laws have struggled to clear that bar.
The First Circuit's Reasoning: The Second Amendment Doesn't Cover Buying a Gun
Here’s where the First Circuit’s decision gets interesting — and important.
The court held that the waiting period law doesn’t even reach step two of the Bruen analysis. Why? Because the Second Amendment’s text protects the right to keep arms (possess them) and bear arms (carry them). It says nothing about the right to acquire or purchase firearms immediately.
The court drew a clear line: buying a gun is something that happens before you possess or carry it. The 72-hour wait doesn’t stop anyone from ultimately owning a firearm — it just delays the moment you walk out the door with one. In the court’s view, that distinction matters enormously. The law regulates the sale, not the possession.
The court compared the waiting period to a “shall-issue” licensing system — the kind where any law-abiding person who applies is entitled to a permit. Those systems delay your ability to carry, but they don’t deny it. The Supreme Court has said those kinds of laws are presumptively constitutional. The First Circuit concluded that Maine’s waiting period works the same way: it delays, but does not deny, access to firearms for law-abiding citizens.
The court also noted that federal law already allows background checks to take up to 72 hours before a sale can be completed. Maine’s waiting period doesn’t go further than what federal law already permits in that context.
Finally, the court asked whether the law was “abusive” toward Second Amendment rights — the one remaining question after it concluded the law fell outside the Amendment’s plain text. It found the law was not abusive. The delay is modest, contains meaningful exceptions for law enforcement, family transfers, and antique collectors, and targets a documented public safety problem.
What This Means Going Forward
This decision matters beyond Maine’s borders.
The First Circuit covers Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, and Puerto Rico. Its legal reasoning — that laws regulating the acquisition of firearms sit outside the Second Amendment’s plain text — could influence how courts in this circuit analyze other gun regulations, including waiting periods, background check requirements, and purchase conditions.
It also signals that not every gun regulation will require an exhaustive search for 18th-century historical analogues. Laws that delay rather than deny firearm access, and that impose reasonable conditions on commercial sales, may survive Bruen scrutiny without that step.
That said, this is a preliminary ruling. The case goes back to the district court for further proceedings, and it could ultimately reach the Supreme Court. The legal debate over Bruen’s reach is far from over.
Massachusetts Gun Laws Are Constantly Evolving
If you live in Massachusetts, you already know that our state has some of the most complex firearms laws in the country — and they continue to change. The Chapter 135 reforms, shifting standards for License to Carry suitability, and ongoing litigation mean that understanding your rights requires staying current with the law.
At the Law Office of Matthew W. Peterson, we help people across Eastern Massachusetts obtain their License to Carry, navigate firearms licensing appeals, and understand how evolving laws affect their rights. Whether you’re applying for an LTC for the first time, dealing with a denial or restriction, or simply trying to make sense of where the law stands, we’re here to help. Call us at 617-391-0060 to schedule a strategy session with us.
