The Supreme Court on Thursday handed gun rights advocates another significant victory, ruling 6-3 that Hawaii’s restrictions on carrying handguns on private property violate the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
In an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court concluded that Hawaii cannot broadly prohibit lawful concealed carry permit holders from possessing firearms on private property open to the public unless they first obtain a property owner’s express permission.
“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives. We hold that the law is unconstitutional,” Alito wrote for the majority.
The Court’s three liberal justices dissented.
The decision marks the latest instance of the Court’s conservative majority applying its expanded interpretation of the Second Amendment, which requires modern firearm regulations to be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of gun laws.
In defending its law, Hawaii pointed to historical examples that included anti-poaching laws from the founding era as well as firearm restrictions enacted later through the Black Codes in an effort to demonstrate historical support for its approach.
The challenged law, known as Act 52, was enacted after the Supreme Court expanded Second Amendment protections in an earlier ruling.
Under Act 52, individuals holding concealed carry permits were required to obtain explicit permission from a property owner before carrying a handgun onto private property that is open to the public. Permission could be granted verbally, in writing, or through a “clear and conspicuous” sign indicating firearms were allowed.
The law applied to a wide range of businesses and public-facing private properties, including shopping malls, restaurants, bowling alleys, banks, and numerous other locations.
The legal challenge was brought by Hawaii residents Jason Wolford, Alison Wolford, and Atom Kasprzycki, along with the Hawaii Firearms Coalition. The plaintiffs successfully challenged the law before a federal district court.
However, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed that victory and sided with Hawaii, the challengers appealed to the Supreme Court.
The case attracted significant national attention and drew support from several gun rights organizations. Friend-of-the-court briefs were filed by the National Rifle Association, the National Association for Gun Rights, and Gun Owners of America. The Trump administration also backed the challengers, joined by approximately 25 Republican-led states.
Supporters of Hawaii’s law likewise filed briefs urging the Court to uphold the restriction. Those groups included the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, more than 15 Democratic-led states, and the cities of Baltimore and New Haven, Connecticut.
Thursday’s ruling represents the second time this Supreme Court term that the justices have sided with gun rights advocates in a major Second Amendment case.
Earlier this month, on June 18, the Court limited the federal government’s ability to prosecute individuals for firearm possession solely because they sometimes use marijuana.
The Court’s latest decision also comes as additional Second Amendment disputes remain pending. For months, the justices have been considering whether to take up challenges involving state bans on AR-15-style rifles and high-capacity magazines, cases that could further shape the scope of firearm regulations nationwide.
With Thursday’s ruling, the Court continued applying its historical-tradition test to evaluate firearm restrictions, striking down Hawaii’s default ban on carrying handguns onto private property open to the public without the owner’s express consent.
