The Supreme Court of the United States recently ruled on the case of Wolford vs. Lopez, stating that Hawaii’s law on concealed carry on private property infringes upon the Second and 14th Amendments. This law barred licensed individuals from carrying firearms for self-defense on private property without explicit consent from the property owner. After the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this law, it reached the Supreme Court.
In its decision, the Court emphasized that the Hawaiian law, which restricts concealed carry permit holders from bringing handguns onto private property accessible to the public without the owner’s express permission, violates constitutional rights. Justice Samuel Alito highlighted that Hawaii had previously modified its carry permit laws, but the new legislation imposed even stricter limitations. Essentially, carrying firearms on most private property now requires direct consent from the owner, which contrasts sharply with common law principles that generally allow entry unless explicitly denied.
Alito remarked that the Court assessed the legality of Hawaii’s gun laws, noting that the two-step analysis from the Bruen ruling indicated that this law did not hold up. He concluded that Hawaii’s law directly infringes on the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, leading the Court to reverse the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and send the case back for further proceedings aligned with their opinion.
