Lawyer who beat Hawaii gun law calls state’s reliance on Black Code ‘disgraceful’
Lawyer helping to persuade Supreme Court The official who voted Thursday to lift Hawaii’s private property concealed carry restriction criticized the state’s reliance on the Reconstruction-era Black Code to defend the law.
By a 6-3 decision Wolford-LopezIn its case, the Court ruled that Hawaii cannot require licensed gun owners to obtain express permission before carrying firearms on private public property. Opponents of gun rights called this policy the “vampire rule” because legal gun owners had to be “invited” before entering businesses while armed.
“It is shameful that any state would rely on a law specifically aimed at eliminating these rights. Second Amendment “The rights of Black Americans at the time or any constitutional rights,” Kevin O’Grady, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, told Fox News Digital.
“And it’s not surprising that Hawaii would rely on this because it is so diametrically opposed to the Second Amendment. We fully expected the Supreme Court to describe this as the type of law that should absolutely not be looked at to decide whether something is constitutional, because it’s a perfect example of something that’s unconstitutional.”
Supreme Court Grants Second Amendment Win to Concealed Carry Owners in Blue State Gun Control Case
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson speaks onstage during the “Ketanji Brown Jackson on Lovely One: A Memoir” panel at The Atlantic Festival on September 20, 2024 in Washington, DC.
(Getty Images)
A major flashpoint was Hawaii’s effort to legitimize the law under the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision. new York State Rifle and Pistol Association – Bruen. Courts evaluating firearm regulations since Bruen have generally asked whether modern gun restrictions are consistent with the nation’s historic tradition of firearm regulation.
Hawaii has cited many historic laws, including the 1865 law. Louisiana Law enacted as part of the Black Codes after the Civil War. The law made it illegal to carry a firearm onto another person’s property without the owner’s permission.
Justice Samuel AlitoWriting for the majority, he rejected this claim outright, calling the Louisiana law a “defective artifact” enacted to disarm newly freed Black Americans and leave them defenseless in the aftermath of the Civil War. He concluded that the law “cannot be taken seriously” as evidence of the original public meaning of the Second Amendment.
But in his dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the Court had overlooked an important constitutional question.
Jackson did not defend the Black Codes, which he acknowledged were racist and used to oppress newly freed Black Americans. But he argued that the Court should first decide whether the Louisiana law violates the Second Amendment or whether the real constitutional issue arises from its racially discriminatory application.
Supreme Court Takes Second Amendment Case Challenging Hawaii Gun Law
Todd Settergren looks at handguns in his display case at Setterarms gun shop on January 13, 2017 in Walnut Creek, California.
“Black Codes may be invalid inputs for Bruen’s test, but only if they violate the Second Amendment, which may or may not be the case,” Jackson wrote.
Instead, he argued: Supreme Court’s Bruen frameworkThe court could not simply reject these laws without explaining why they should not count as historical evidence.
He highlighted two possibilities: Either the firearm restrictions in the Black Acts were constitutional but applied in a racially discriminatory manner—making the constitutional flaw an equal protection issue—or the restrictions independently violated the Second Amendment. The court argued that it never resolved this question before excluding the case. Louisiana law considered.
U.S. Court of Appeals Strikes Down California’s Open Carry Ban in Major Second Amendment Ruling
“Any history “Or it is not, and the Court must recognize that the test it creates is unlimited.”
His reasoning caused immediate rebuff from critics; Fourteenth Amendment It was passed in response to laws such as the Black Codes that denied newly freed Black Americans their constitutional rights, such as the right to bear arms.
Rain clouds hover over the United States Supreme Court building in Washington, DC, on June 18, 2026.
“I will just point out to him what Justice Alito pointed out in his majority decision, which is that this was done in response to these types of laws. The fourteenth amendment became law Hannah Hill, vice president of the National Gun Rights Association, told Fox News Digital:
U.S. Judge Overturns Illinois’ Semi-Automatic Weapons Ban, Governor Promises Quick Appeal
“That’s your answer,” Hill continued. “Yes, there was a historical tradition; constitutional amendment “To correct this disenfranchisement, it’s now in the Constitution, so I think he should probably go back to law school.”
Tyler Yzaguirre, president Second Amendment InstituteHe echoed O’Grady and Hill’s criticism.
“These laws were not legitimate expressions of our nation’s constitutional tradition; they were examples of the government using its power to deprive Americans of a fundamental right,” Yzaguirre told Fox News Digital. “The Court was right to reject the idea that such laws could define the historical limits of the Second Amendment.”
Click Here to Download Fox News App
Businesses can still ban guns by posting or enforcing a “no firearms” policy. But what Hawaii can’t do, the Court said, is treat every business as off-limits to licensed gun owners unless the owner specifically says guns are allowed.
Original article source: Lawyer who defeated Hawaii gun law calls state’s reliance on Black Code ‘shameful’
