Supreme Court rejects another attempt to bypass the Second Amendment

1 independent outlets are covering this story. Verification: Watching — single-source — not yet independently corroborated. Patriot Watch links to original reporting; we don't republish it.

Read the story at Daily Signal →

What we know

The Supreme Court rejected an attempt to bypass Second Amendment protections.

Patriot Watch first flagged this story 15 hr ago, when Daily Signal reported it. So far this remains a single-source report. The most recent report came 15 hr ago from Daily Signal. Verification tier: Watching — single-source — not yet independently corroborated.

⚖ The Constitutional Angle

In Bruen the Court held that when the Second Amendment's text covers a person's conduct, the government must justify a restriction by proving it fits the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation. In Wolford the Court used that test to strike down Hawaii's ban on licensed carriers carrying on private property open to the public without the owner's express permission.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Kevin P. Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police 597 U.S. 1 (2022)

Vote: 6-3 · Opinion: Thomas

New York's requirement that applicants demonstrate 'proper cause' — a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community — to obtain an unrestricted public-carry license violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public. The Court held the Second Amendment protects a right to carry handguns publicly for self-defense, and rejected the two-step means-end framework lower courts had applied after Heller.

Jason Wolford v. Anne E. Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii 609 U.S. ___ (2026) (slip op.); U.S. Reports page not yet assigned

Vote: 6-3 · Opinion: Alito

Hawaii's law (Haw. Rev. Stat. § 134-9.5(a) (2023)) prohibiting licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the owner's express authorization violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The decision restores the common-law default: a person lawfully carrying enjoys the implied license to enter property held open to the public unless the owner withdraws consent — a State may not flip that default to require express permission.

Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited