Mont. AG Knudsen Leads 28 States in Brief Attacking Maine’s Waiting-Period Law

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen led a group of 28 states in filing a brief. The amicus supports a challenge to Maine’s unconstitutional waiting-period law, filed in the 1st Circuit.

In 2024, a waiting-period law went into effect in Maine. The law imposed a 72-hour waiting period for the purchase of firearms. In February, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine preliminarily enjoined the law from being enforced. On appeal to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, the court rejected the state’s request for a stay on the order. On June 4, 2025, Knudsen filed an amicus in support of the plaintiffs.

“The amicus brief, filed in the case of Beckwith v. Frey, asks the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Court to affirm the district court’s decision halting Maine’s waiting-period law that went into effect in 2024,” a release put out by Knudsen’s office said. “The district court properly found that the right to acquire firearms is covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text and that Maine’s proposed historical analogues—licensing and intoxication laws—flunked Bruen’s inquiry.”

The law in question, S.P. 958 – L.D. 2238, states that: “A seller may not knowingly deliver a firearm to a buyer pursuant to an agreement sooner than 72 hours after the agreement. The 72-hour waiting period must be concurrent with any waiting period imposed by any background check process required by federal or state law.”

The brief opens by asserting that: “Just a few years ago, this Court reminded lower courts that the right to keep and bear arms ‘is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.”’ […] Yet courts across the country continue to defer to legislative ‘judgements regarding firearms regulations’[.]”

Bruen’s “analogical inquiry” is cited in the brief and points out that there are no “relevantly similar” laws or regulations from 1791.

“Maine failed to carry its burden to show that its waiting-period law is ‘part of the historical tradition that de limits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms,’” Attorney General Knudsen wrote. “The district court found that Beckwith was likely to succeed on the merits of her Second Amendment claim because the waiting-period law ‘employs no standard at all to justify disarming individuals.’”

The 25-page brief includes Knudsen and the attorneys general from the following states as signatories: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The filing also includes the president of the Arizona Senate and speaker of the Arizona House.

Knudsen is currently serving in his first year of his second term as Montana’s attorney general. In January, Knudsen told Bearing Arms that he’s going to continue to fight for the Second Amendment. “When I took over as attorney general I made the decision that we were going to be really aggressive on the Second Amendment…” Knudsen said. “…[o]n defending the industry. And I’m really proud of the work we’ve done.”

This filing comes a day before the Supreme Court’s decision in the Smith and Wesson case which dismissed Mexico’s claims against American gunmakers–one where Knudsen also filed an amicus. 

“This is a win for gun manufacturers and gun owners across the country. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act makes it clear – American firearms manufacturers should not and do not have to answer for the actions of criminals,” Knudsen said about Smith and Wesson. “Today, the Supreme Court unanimously agreed. Mexico’s dangerous gun policies are to blame for their own gun violence crisis, not American gun manufacturers following the law.”

All eyes will be watching how the case in Maine fleshes out. The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals is not traditionally friendly to the Second Amendment. Their refusal to stay the lower court’s decision is commendable, and a departure from their traditionally hostile treatment of this civil right.

If you’re interested in catching our January interview with Attorney General Austin Knudsen from Montana, you can check it out HERE or in the embed below.