Federal judge refuses to enter agreed judgment against Florida’s three-day gun waiting period

A federal judge in Tampa on Wednesday, Oct. 28, refused to enter a judgment, agreed to by the state officials who enforce the law, declaring that Florida’s mandatory three-day wait between buying a firearm and taking it home violates the Second Amendment to the extent it makes retailers hold a firearm longer than a background check takes.¹ U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday denied the parties’ joint motion, which relied on Rule 68, the federal rule on offers of judgment.¹

The order invites Gov. Ron DeSantis, the Florida House, the Florida Senate, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence to take part as friends of the court. Participants should file a notice by Nov. 30, 2026, and may file briefs of up to 25 pages by Feb. 1, 2027. Others may ask the court’s permission by Nov. 30. The plaintiffs and the state may each file a brief by Feb. 19, 2027.¹

Why the judge said no

Merryday wrote that the parties were using Rule 68 in a “novel” way to obtain a ruling on a constitutional question. He said striking down a state law requires a full adversarial presentation and that the docket held no merits briefing beyond the complaint. He noted that federal appeals courts have split on waiting periods: the 10th Circuit in 2025 cast doubt on a seven-day wait, and the 1st Circuit in 2026 upheld Maine’s three-day wait, a decision the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review on Oct. 19.¹

He also wrote that an injunction blocking enforcement of part of Florida’s constitution requires a court’s own finding that federal law is violated, which the parties cannot supply by agreement.¹

How the case got here

Three Florida gun buyers, a firearms retailer and the National Rifle Association sued on Aug. 25, 2025, naming Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Mark Glass, Attorney General James Uthmeier and three state attorneys as defendants.² An amended complaint filed March 20, 2026, added a fourth buyer, a second retailer and the rest of Florida’s 20 state attorneys.³⁴ On June 5, 2026, the defendants served an offer of judgment and the plaintiffs accepted it the same day; the parties jointly moved for entry of judgment on June 30.¹⁵

The proposed judgment would have declared the waiting-period provisions unconstitutional to that extent, barred the defendants from enforcing them, awarded the plaintiffs $10,000 in fees and costs and provided no damages.⁵ The NRA announced the agreement June 5.⁶

On Sept. 9, Merryday ordered both sides to explain why the case should not be dismissed as lacking a real dispute.⁷ The defendants, represented by the attorney general’s office, responded on Sept. 23 that after reviewing the complaint they had determined that, under binding U.S. Supreme Court and 11th Circuit precedent, the waiting-period provisions violate the Second and 14th Amendments. They said the plaintiffs had not coordinated with them before suing, that the offer also reflected a wish to avoid significant legal costs, and that they did not oppose briefing if the court wanted it.⁸ The plaintiffs said the defendants continue to enforce the waiting period.⁹

The law at issue

Article I, Section 8(b) of the Florida Constitution, adopted by voters in 1990, requires a three-day wait, excluding weekends and legal holidays, between the retail purchase and delivery of a handgun.¹⁰ Section 790.0655 of the Florida Statutes applies the wait to all firearms, ending it after three such days or when the background check is complete, whichever is later. Early delivery by a retailer is a third-degree felony.¹¹ Article VIII, Section 5(b), adopted in 1998, lets counties require a three- to five-day wait on firearm sales.¹⁰

What the records do not show

• No court has ruled on whether Florida’s waiting period is constitutional; the order only refuses the agreed judgment.¹
• The record does not yet show whether any invited official or group will participate.
• The order does not say what will happen if no one files a brief defending the law.