By Fred Lucas, The Daily Signal | June 25, 2026
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a Hawaii law banning licensed permit holders from carrying concealed handguns in public accommodations, without the property owner’s authorization, violates the Second and 14th Amendments.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority in the case of Wolford v. Lopez.
The ruling applies to private property open to the public, such as stores, restaurants, and gas stations, as well as other locations covered by public accommodation laws.
Alito rejected an argument an argument from the state about applying local values.
“The Second Amendment has the same meaning in all parts of the United States. It cannot give way to ‘the spirit of Aloha’ in Hawaii, contra, any more than it can yield to the spirit of the Big Apple (Bruen) or the Windy City (McDonald),” Alito wrote. “It applies in the same way to our 50th State (where about 8% of adults possess guns) and our 49th State (where the figure is roughly 59%) Merely local attitudes can neither shrink nor inflate the meaning of fundamental Bill of Rights guarantees that apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Plaintiffs argued that carrying a firearm is an “implied right” unless the property owner opposes it. They said Hawaii’s law flips that presumption and requires the property owner’s consent prior to accessing the property with a handgun.
Hawaii, represented in oral arguments by Neal Katyal, a former acting U.S. solicitor general, argued the law protects private property rights.
The ruling could apply to any state that seeks to regulate guns. At least four other states have laws similar to Hawaii’s restrictions.
Hawaii points to a 1771 New Jersey law and an 1865 Louisiana law as precedent for states requiring the prior consent of a property owner for someone to enter with a gun.
The Supreme Court in 2022 struck down New York’s requirement that concealed carry holders demonstrate a need for self-defense, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
Hawaii’s Act 52, enacted after the ruling, states that someone with the license to carry a handgun may not “enter or remain on private property of another person while carrying a loaded or unloaded firearm … unless the person has been given express authority.” The law applies regardless of whether the property is open to the public. Four other states have similar laws: California, Maryland, New York, and New Jersey, according to SCOTUSblog.
The high court heard the case because of a circuit split. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the New York law. The 3rd U.S. Circuit struck down New Jersey’s law. However, the 9th U.S. Circuit upheld Hawaii’s law.
“For years, the State of Hawaii made it almost impossible to obtain a license to carry a firearm,” the majority opinion began.
“Hawaii’s new rule imposes severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the State’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit,” the opinion noted. “When these permit holders leave home, not only must they take care to avoid all the territory where the possession of a gun is prohibited outright, but they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, restaurants, and stores. This law flips the default rule at common law, under which anyone has an implied license to enter property held open to the public unless the property owner withdraws consent.”
Fred Lucas is senior investigative reporter for the Daily Signal. He is the author of “The Myth of Voter Suppression: The Left’s Assault on Clean Elections.”
Original article link
