Supreme Court Rejects Rule Limiting Concealed Carry on Publicly Accessible Private Property

The Supreme Court ruled that Hawaii violated the Second and 14th Amendments by requiring licensed concealed-carry permit holders to obtain express permission before carrying handguns on private property open to the public.

By yourNEWS Media Newsroom

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Hawaii law that restricted where licensed concealed-carry permit holders could carry handguns, ruling that the state’s policy violated the Second and 14th Amendments.

The decision in Wolford v. Lopez reversed a ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which had upheld the law. The Hawaii measure barred licensed concealed carriers from bringing firearms onto private property open to the public unless the property owner first gave express authorization.

The case centered on whether Hawaii could make concealed carry on publicly accessible private property illegal by default unless the owner affirmatively allowed firearms.

SCOTUSBlog summarized the decision by stating, “The court holds Hawaii’s law barring licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express authorization violates the 2nd and 14th Amendments.”

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion, saying Hawaii enacted the policy after the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen decision limited the ability of states to restrict public carry through discretionary permitting systems.

“Hawaii responded by replacing its old law on carry permits with new laws that achieved a similar result,” Alito wrote. “On a large portion of the land within the State’s boundaries, possession of a firearm is now flatly prohibited. And the law now before us severely burdens the ability to carry a firearm in much of the rest of the State by prohibiting firearms on private property without the express and affirmative consent of the property owner.”

Alito said the Hawaii rule departed from the traditional common-law approach for private property that is held open to the public. Under that standard, people may enter unless the owner expressly says they cannot.

“This law departs sharply from the standard common-law rule on access to private property held open to the public,” Alito wrote. “Under that rule, everyone, including those lawfully carrying firearms, may enter unless expressly prohibited from doing so. By contrast, under the new Hawaii law, no one carrying a firearm may enter without the property owner’s express authorization.”

The court reviewed Hawaii’s law under the framework established in Bruen and found that the state’s restriction could not survive constitutional scrutiny.

“The Hawaii law at issue here violates the constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” Alito wrote. “Therefore, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

The ruling sends the case back to the lower courts and marks another major Second Amendment decision limiting state restrictions on licensed concealed carry.