Add Row 
Add 
Initiative Against Vermont's Unwarranted Gun Waiting Period
On November 13, 2025, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), alongside notable partners including the California Rifle & Pistol Association and the National Rifle Association, filed an amicus brief appealing against Vermont's controversial 72-hour waiting period for firearm purchases. This legal move signals a renewed commitment to upholding Second Amendment rights and dismissing restrictive measures that many argue infringe on these rights.
Leveraging Historical Precedent
The SAF's argument is anchored in a critical review of historical contexts surrounding firearm access. Their Director of Legal Research and Education, Kostas Moros, emphasized that both Supreme Court rulings in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen and Rahimi should guide the interpretation of the Second Amendment. According to Moros, the waiting period has no historical precedence in the United States, even in the wake of significant advancements in firearms accessibility during the 19th century.
Research highlighted in the amicus brief includes newspaper advertisements from as early as 1745, which illustrate a long-standing tradition of immediate access to firearms, endorsing the notion that the right to keep and bear arms is timeless and should be afforded to responsible citizens without delay.
Recent Legal Triumphs Fueling This Appeal
This amicus filing is part of a broader trend where similar waiting period restrictions are being challenged across the country. For instance, the Tenth Circuit recently ruled against a like-minded waiting period in Ortega v. Grisham, showcasing an emerging momentum aimed at dismantling such barriers on gun ownership.
Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF's founder, underscored the weight of these recent victories. He stated, “Waiting periods to exercise a constitutional right are impermissible. The right to keep and bear arms doesn’t have a timestamp,” stressing that the potential for immediate access to firearms is integral to the Second Amendment.
The Bigger Picture: Implications for Second Amendment Advocacy
This legal initiative raises crucial questions about the future of gun rights legislation in the U.S. Amidst a backdrop of ongoing national debate about gun control and safety measures, the outcome of these court proceedings could reshape the landscape of gun rights — potentially impacting numerous similar cases that are currently pending across various states.
As constitutional rights face an evolving interpretation, it becomes imperative for citizens and advocates to question how legislative measures align with the traditions and principles laid out by the framers of the Constitution. The implications of this case extend far beyond Vermont, echoing through the halls of legislatures nationwide.
Join the Conversation
As we follow this significant case, it's vital for individuals who value their rights to engage with the ongoing debates and assessments surrounding gun ownership laws. Understanding the historical context and ongoing legal battles will empower citizens to advocate effectively for their rights.
Write A Comment