Michelle Lujan Grisham, Governor Michael B. Sloane, Director
Media Contact: Darren Vaughan, Communications Director New Mexico Department of Wildlife Darren.Vaughan@dgf.nm.gov 505-476-8027
Public Contact: Information Center ispa@dgf.nm.gov 888-248-6866
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEJune 30, 2026Limited private-land pronghorn licenses available SANTA FE – The New Mexico Department of Wildlife reminds hunters that private-land pronghorn licenses in northeastern New Mexico are available for the 2026-2027 license year.
Private-land pronghorn license sales are limited in Game Management Units (GMU) 41, 42, 47, 56, 57, 58 and 59. These licenses will be available beginning at 8 a.m. July 1 through the Department’s Online License System, license vendors or by phone at 888-248-6866.
Hunters should purchase any required game hunting license and/or stamps before July 1. Limited licenses will be sold on a first-come, first-served basis and are expected to sell out quickly. Once a hunter selects a limited hunt code online, they will have five minutes to complete their purchase before the license is returned to inventory.
If a hunter is successful in purchasing one of these licenses, they must obtain written permission from the landowner before hunting.
Other licenses available beginning July 1 include over-the-counter javelina, fall turkey, private-land deer, private-land Barbary sheep and secondary management zone private-land elk, as well as federal Duck Stamps. ###
ABQ GUNS will be closed on Memorial Day in honor of all the service Men and Women who have served and offered their lives to defend this great country. May GOD bless you all!
GOD bless Sr. Airman James D. Gallegos for your Service and ultimate sacrifice!
We will reopen on Tuesday 5/26 to assist you all in your needs.
The United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) recently filed a complaintfor declaratory and injunctive relief against the State of Colorado and the Colorado Department of Public Safety in federal court challenging the constitutionality of Colorado’s ban on magazines with the capacity to hold more than fifteen rounds of ammunition.
Passed in 2013, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-302 (the “Magazine Ban”) makes it a criminal misdemeanor to sell, transfer, or possess in Colorado a “large-capacity magazine,” which is defined to include a “fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip, or similar device capable of accepting, or that is designed to be readily converted to accept, more than fifteen rounds of ammunition.” The DOJ argues that, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s holding in Bruen, the Magazine Ban violates the Second Amendment because it is inconsistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
The complaint alleges: “The Magazine Ban’s characterization of these magazines as ‘large capacity’ is a misnomer, because magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds are, in fact, standard capacity magazines for many popular firearms, including the AR-15 rifle, the most popular rifle in America.” DOJ’s press release stated, “This law unconstitutionally infringes on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in common use for lawful purposes….Law-abiding Americans own hundreds of millions of magazines such as those banned by the State.” Citing the widespread use of such “large-capacity magazines” for lawful purposes, the DOJ claims that the Magazine Ban runs afoul of the Heller case, where the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in common use for lawful purposes. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division noted, “Colorado’s ban on certain magazines is political virtue signaling at the expense of Americans’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”
This case could affect many other states with magazine bans, including those with ten round limits, so the industry should take note beyond the borders of Colorado. Renzulli Law Firm, LLP will continue to monitor new and developing firearms litigation around the country.
If you have any questions concerning firearms-related litigation, please contact Christopher Renzulli. Renzulli Law Firm is Monitoring Firearm-Related Legislative Developments Renzulli Law Firm, nationally recognized as one of the premier law firms in the country serving the Firearms Industry, is monitoring legislative developments affecting the industry and publishing regular updates which are available by e-mail and on the Firm’s website.
This e-mail is provided by Renzulli Law Firm for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended and should not be construed as legal advice.
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section is pleased to announce our websites www.fbi.gov/nics and www.edo.cjis.gov have recently been updated to better assist your customers receiving denial decisions during NICS checks.
Some of the improvements your customers will see on ourwww.fbi.gov/nics website include:
The separation of challenge information from Voluntary Appeal File (VAF) information. Each topic now has its own launchpad on the website’s homepage. Examples of the launchpad images are shown above.
Expanded information on both topics by enhancing thedescriptions, step-by-step instructions, and frequently asked questions (FAQs).
Providing more information regarding the process of “requesting the reason for denial.” Denied individual may request the reason for their denial decision, and the NICS Section will respond with the category of the denial within five business days of receiving the request. If, after receiving the reason for denial, the individual wants to challenge the denial decision or apply for VAF, they can pursue those services.
Improving the navigation between topics, and to the eDO site.
The eDO site is the Electronic Department Order website—it was primarily designed to provide individuals with access to obtain their identity history summary, often referred to as criminal history record, but it also provides direct access for individuals to initiate a NICS challenge or begin the VAF process. Appellants and VAF applicants can directly upload fingerprint cards and any other supporting documentation through the eDO website. We partnered closely with FBI colleagues to improve the eDO experience for our NICS customers bydesigning a more intuitive, customer-friendly landing page for NICS-related challenges and VAF applications.
We are committed to supporting you and your customers, and one way we’re doing that is by providing faster turnaround times on challenges and VAF requests. As mentioned, the NICS Section will provide the reason for denial within 5 business days, and since 2018, we have met the 60-day mandate on completing challenge requests. While there is no required timeframe for responding to VAF requests, we generally process both challenge and VAF requests in just 45 days.
The www.fbi.gov/nics website is not only for individuals interested in challenging a NICS denial or applying for VAF. The site offers a broad range of resources for the public and for federal firearms licensees (FFLs). Anyone can use this website to learn more about NICS services and obtain current and historical stats and information about NICS. There is a launchpad designed specifically for our FFL partners which includes tutorials on the most common E-Check processes, quick reference guides, and numerous hyperlinks to things like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives sites, ordering resolution cards, and subscribing to receive NICS updates.
Our goal with the website updates is to make processes clearer, faster, and more accessible for everyone. We encourage you to tell your customers about these improved resources so they can take full advantage of the tools and information available. Please feel free to let us know if you have any questions or suggestions on future improvements.
The state doesn’t want to give up and according to MSLF its an exercise in futility. Judge Browning was ready to issue a final judgment today but the state is still fighting it.
There are 3 more conferences before the final hearing.
Apr 20 will be the motion for summary judgment,
May 11 will be to hear responses and
Jul 1 will for replies.
The final hearing will be Jun 2. Judge Browning said he will issue his decision by Aug 28, maybe earlier.
Judge Browning stated that he is bound by the 10ths decision.
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA’S HIGHEST COURT STRIKES DOWN DC’S MAGAZINE CAPACITY BAN
On March 5, 2026, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the District’s highest court, issued a decision in Benson v. United States,holding that the District of Columbia’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition is unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment. This decision has significant implications because fourteen states have laws prohibiting the sale or possession of magazines based on their capacity. In Benson, the court concluded that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds are “arms” for purposes of the Second Amendment, and that they are in “not only common but ubiquitous use for lawful purposes” across the United States. The court further found, using the framework articulated in the Supreme Court’s decision in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, that “there is no history or tradition of blanket bans on arms in such common use.” As a result, the court held that the District of Columbia’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds is unconstitutional. The Benson case arose from the conviction of the defendant who was stopped by law enforcement in the District and found to be in possession of a semi-automatic pistol equipped with a 30-round magazine. The defendant was charged and convicted of multiple offenses, including violation of D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b)-(c), the District’s law prohibiting possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition. In defense of the charges against him, the defendant challenged the constitutionality of the District’s magazine capacity ban, arguing that it violated the Second Amendment. After holding that the magazine capacity restriction is unconstitutional, the Court of Appeals reversed the defendant’s convictions. This decision is important because it recognizes that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds are components of many commonly owned firearms and are possessed by millions of Americans for lawful purposes. Applying the Bruen test, the court found that there is no analogous historical tradition of firearm regulation that would support a ban on such magazines. The decision creates a divide among the federal circuit courts and state courts of last resort because federal Courts of Appeals have upheld similar laws in other states. For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld California’s magazine capacity ban in the case of Duncan v. Bonta. The court in Benson explicitly disagreed with the Ninth Circuit’s finding in Duncan that ownership statistics related to the use of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition are not an appropriate measurement of “common use.” The Bensen court found that ownership statistics are relevant to the Bruen analysis and that such magazines “are the most preferred type of magazine” in the United States. This split means that the constitutionality of laws prohibiting magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition will eventually require resolution by the Supreme Court. The Bensen decision is another example of courts attempting to interpret and apply the Bruen historical tradition test with respect to firearms laws around the country. The Supreme Court is expected to provide more guidance on how to apply the Bruen test when it issues a decision later this year in United States v. Hemani, which will address the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), a provision of the Gun Control Act that prohibits the possession of firearms by anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.” Renzulli Law Firm, LLP will continue to monitor new and developing firearms related litigation around the country. If you have any questions concerning the firearms industry, please contact Christopher Renzulli.
Renzulli Law Firm is Monitoring Firearm-Related Legislative Developments Renzulli Law Firm, nationally recognized as one of the premier law firms in the country serving the Firearms Industry, is monitoring legislative developments affecting the industry and publishing regular updates which are available by e-mail and on the Firm’s website.
Our firearms legislation updates are available here. Additional information about the Firm’s litigation, counseling and consulting services for the Firearms Industry is available here.
Alert New Mexico House Hearing On SB 17 Your Neighborhood Gun Store AND Gun Show Needs Your Help On Wednesday, February 11, 2026, many New Mexico gun stores will be closed so their owners and employees can attend the hearing on SB 17. This bill threatens the survival of local, family-owned firearm businesses. If it passes, many of these stores will be forced to shut down permanently. That is why so many gun store owners will be in the hearing instead of open for business — they are fighting for their livelihoods and their employees’ jobs. SB 17 – HOUSE COMMITTEE HEARING NOTICE Senate Bill 17 will be heard in the House Commerce & Economic Development Committee. Wednesday, February 11, 2026 1:30 PM Room 317, New Mexico State Capitol This is a critical stop for SB 17 in the House. Attendance, testimony, and legislator contact matter right now. We only need to turn one vote to end this unconstitutional act. Current Status of SB 17 Bill Title: Stop Illegal Gun Trade and Extremely Dangerous Weapons Act Contact Your Legislature – What to Say When contacting legislators or providing testimony, keep it respectful, brief, and focused: Ask them to OPPOSE SB 17SB 17 places heavy new burdens on law-abiding firearm dealers without addressing criminal misuse.The bill risks job losses, higher costs, and business closures for New Mexico small businesses.Similar laws in other states have led to costly legal challenges paid for by taxpayers.Public safety can be improved by enforcing existing laws, not by restricting lawful commerce and constitutional rights. A simple message works: “I respectfully ask you to oppose SB 17. This bill harms lawful businesses, invites costly litigation, and does not address violent crime.” Who to Contact Priority contacts: Members of the House Commerce & Economic Development CommitteeYour own State Representative How to engage: Call and/or email committee members before Wednesday’s hearingAttend the hearing in person if possibleZoom in to speak during public commentBe polite, concise, and identify yourself as a New Mexico constituent House Commerce & Economic Development Committee Representative Doreen Y. Gallegos – (D) CHAIR Email: Doreen.gallegos@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4329 Representative Janelle Anyanonu – (D) Vice Chair Email: Janelle.Anyanonu@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4435 Representative Joshua N. Hernandez – (R) Ranking Member Email: joshua.hernandez@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4215 Representative Gail Armstrong – (R) – Minority Floor Leader Email: gail@gailfornewmexico.com Office Phone: 505-986-4758 Representative Art De La Cruz – (D) Email: art.delacruz@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4333 Representative Derrick J. Lente – (D) Email: derrick.lente@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4420 Representative Jimmy G. Mason – (R) Email: Jimmy.Mason@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4220 Representative Marian Matthews – (D) Email: marian.matthews@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4248 Representative Mark B. Murphy – (R) Email: mark.murphy@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4454 Representative Cristina Parajón – (D) Email: cristina.parajon@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4436 Representative Linda Serrato – (D) Email: linda.serrato@nmlegis.gov Office Phone: 505-986-4243 CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR NM HOUSE REPRESENTATIVEConcise email list, easier to copy and paste:Doreen.gallegos@nmlegis.govJanelle.Anyanonu@nmlegis.govjoshua.hernandez@nmlegis.govgail@gailfornewmexico.comart.delacruz@nmlegis.govderrick.lente@nmlegis.govJimmy.Mason@nmlegis.govmarian.matthews@nmlegis.govmark.murphy@nmlegis.govcristina.parajon@nmlegis.govlinda.serrato@nmlegis.gov
You must be logged in to post a comment.