US Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law requiring gun owners to get permission before carrying on private property

The ruling

The US Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a Hawaii law that required gun owners to obtain explicit permission before carrying a handgun onto private property open to the public, such as grocery stores, gas stations, and shopping malls. The 6-3 decision, split along ideological lines, found that the state's 'vampire rule' imposed a severe and unconstitutional burden on the right to bear arms. The ruling is the latest in a line of decisions expanding Second Amendment protections since the court's landmark 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

“The effect of this new rule is to impose severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the state's rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit.”

The Hawaii law, signed by Democratic Governor Josh Green in 2023, made it a misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison, to carry a concealed firearm on privately owned property accessible to the public without the owner's express authorization. Gun owners had argued that the requirement effectively turned the entire state into a no-carry zone, violating their Second Amendment rights.

“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.”

How the case reached the court

The challenge was brought by three Maui residents with concealed-carry permits and the Hawaii Firearms Coalition, who sued shortly after the law's enactment. A federal district court initially blocked the measure, but the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld it, prompting the Supreme Court appeal. The Trump administration filed a brief supporting the challengers, arguing that the permission requirement put lawful gun owners at risk of inadvertently committing a crime while filling a gas tank or grocery shopping.

Scope and impact

The decision directly invalidates the permission requirement, but leaves in place other Hawaii restrictions on guns in so-called sensitive places, including beaches, bars, parks, and schools, which are being contested in separate lower-court proceedings. The ruling is likely to affect similar laws in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and California, where states have also sought to condition concealed carry on private-property consent. In most of the country, however, laws already allow permit holders to carry on private property without explicit prior permission.

Broader gun-rights landscape

Thursday's outcome is the second Supreme Court decision this term favourable to gun owners. On 18 June, the justices ruled unanimously that a Texas marijuana user could not be automatically stripped of gun rights due to illegal drug use. Since the Bruen decision, the court has invalidated a federal bump-stock ban, upheld a law disarming domestic violence restraining-order subjects, and upheld strict rules on ghost guns. The Hawaii case further entrenches the Bruen test, which requires modern gun restrictions to be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.