Supreme Court Issues Three 6-3 Rulings Striking Down Hawaii Gun Restriction and Expanding Trump Immigration Enforcement Powers
The Supreme Court on June 25 ruled 6-3 in Wolford v. Lopez that Hawaii's Act 52, which required concealed-carry permit holders to obtain express property-owner consent before entering any business open to the public, violates the Second Amendment
*Wolford v. Lopez* pulls identical consent-framework statutes in California, Maryland, New York, and New Jersey into the same constitutional infirmity, per SCOTUSblog's specialist legal reporting. Alito's categorical rejection of the 1865 Louisiana Black Codes statute as a permissible *Bruen* analogue narrows the historical record states may invoke to defend carry restrictions, accelerating attrition of post-*Bruen* legislative regimes. Barrett's concurrence closes the dissent's property-rights litigation pathway: Second Amendment scrutiny attaches to arms-bearing property rules regardless of background property law defaults, establishing a nationwide opt-out default for concealed carriers on commercial property. Affected legislatures may attempt functional equivalence through mandatory posted-prohibition signage, recreating consent regimes by regulatory rather than statutory means.
4 sources
- Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii gun restriction -
SCOTUSblog - Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law requiring permission to carry guns in stores and hotels -
PBS NewsHour - Supreme Court strikes down sweeping Hawaii gun law 6-3 -
Washington Examiner - 5 takeaways from Supreme Court's big rulings on immigration, guns -
The Hill