SCOTUS Grills Hawaii on Carry Crackdown in Landmark 2A Case

The Supreme Court just sent Hawaii a message — and it wasn't friendly.

Oral arguments in *Wolford v. Lopez* put multiple justices on record skeptical of Hawaii's restrictive law limiting where law-abiding citizens can carry their legally owned firearms. The Court's questioning cut straight to the bone: Hawaii's restrictions may not survive the *Bruen* standard, which requires states to produce historical analogues from the founding era to justify any gun regulation.

Hawaii's law bans carry across a sprawling list of "sensitive places" — banks, restaurants, public gatherings, and more — so broad that it effectively nullifies the right to carry outside your front door. Gun owners sued, arguing the state turned a constitutional right into a privilege that exists only on paper.

The justices weren't buying it. Conservative justices pressed Hawaii's lawyers hard on whether their historical record actually supports restrictions this sweeping. Even members of the Court less reliably in the pro-2A column raised serious questions about the law's scope.

This case reaches far beyond Hawaii. California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois have enacted near-identical "sensitive places" schemes in direct defiance of *Bruen*. A ruling against Hawaii would expose every one of those laws to the same fate.

The gun-control lobby knows exactly what's at stake. Every Bloomberg-funded outfit and Everytown mouthpiece has been tracking this case, because a loss here unravels years of post-*Bruen* maneuvering designed to gut carry rights without technically banning guns outright.

A decision is expected before the Court's term ends in late June.

**Bottom line:** The six justices who signed onto *Bruen* didn't do it so states could reroute the roadblock with a list of banned zip codes. Watch for a ruling that forces Hawaii — and every copycat state — to actually respect the Second Amendment. Stay locked in at WTFNews.tv for the decision the moment it drops.