Supreme Court Strikes Down Hawaii’s Restrictive Gun Carry Law
The Supreme Court invalidated Hawaii’s law requiring permission to carry guns in stores and hotels.
Why it matters: This ruling broadens Second Amendment rights by limiting state controls on carrying firearms on private property open to the public. It signals potential challenges to similar laws nationwide.
- The 6-3 Supreme Court decision was issued on June 25, 2026, in Wolford v. Lopez.
- The Court struck down Hawaii’s 2023 law requiring explicit permission to carry firearms in private businesses.
- The ruling permits carrying guns on private property open to the public unless owners explicitly prohibit it.
- Similar laws in New York, New Jersey, California, and Maryland may be affected by this decision.
On June 25, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Hawaii law that required individuals to obtain permission before carrying firearms into private businesses such as stores and hotels, according to AP News. The 6-3 decision reiterated the Court’s expanding interpretation of Second Amendment rights established in prior rulings, including a 2022 case that recognized the right to carry firearms outside the home.
Enacted in 2023, Hawaii’s law sought to regulate guns on private property that is open to the public by requiring explicit owner permission. The ruling removes this requirement, allowing individuals to carry firearms on such properties unless the owners explicitly forbid it, as reported by the Washington Post.
The case, Wolford v. Lopez, was brought by three Maui residents with concealed-carry permits and the Hawaii Firearms Coalition, challenging the law as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, emphasized that restricting the carrying of arms in such public spaces relegates the Amendment to "second-class status."
Still, some experts highlight the complexity of balancing gun rights and property owners’ authority. Janet Carter from Everytown Law pointed out that private property owners retain control over their land despite the ruling. Neal Katyal, representing Hawaii, stated that the Constitution protects gun rights but does not imply consent to carry arms on private property without permission.
The ruling’s impact could extend beyond Hawaii and challenge similar regulations in states including New York, New Jersey, California, and Maryland, which employ comparative restrictions on carrying firearms in privately owned spaces accessible to the public.
By the numbers:
- 6-3 — Supreme Court decision ratio in striking down Hawaii's gun carry law
- 2023 — Year Hawaii enacted the law requiring owner permission to carry guns in certain private properties
- 2022 — Prior Supreme Court ruling that expanded the right to carry guns outside the home
Yes, but: The decision acknowledges private property owners can still explicitly prohibit firearms, preserving some property rights despite expanded gun carry rights.
What's next: States with similar firearm restrictions, like New York and California, may face legal challenges or legislative review following this precedent.