By Tanya Metaksa
What Happened—SCOTUS: The Supreme Court rules 6-3 in Wolford v. Lopez that Hawaii’s “vampire rule” — requiring concealed carry permit holders to obtain express permission from property owners before entering any private property open to the public — violates the Second Amendment
SCOTUS
Wolford v. Lopez, No. 24-1046: Challenge to Hawaii’s prohibition on carrying firearms onto private property without the owner’s consent. The Ninth Circuit upheld the law based on the historical tradition of default rules for private property.
Decided 6-3 on June 25, 2026
• The Vampire Rule is Dead The Supreme Court rules 6-3 in Wolford v. Lopez that Hawaii’s “vampire rule” — requiring concealed carry permit holders to obtain express permission from property owners before entering any private property open to the public — violates the Second Amendment.
• The Ruling Explained: Justice Alito, writing for the majority, explains that Hawaii’s law inverted the common law default: under normal rules, anyone (including lawful gun carriers) may enter property open to the public unless expressly prohibited, but Hawaii flipped this to require affirmative permission.
• Spirit of Aloha Argument Destroyed Hawaii argued its unique anti-gun cultural tradition — the “Spirit of Aloha” — justified the law, citing restrictions dating back to King Kamehameha III in 1833. Justice Alito flatly rejected this, holding that the Second Amendment has identical meaning in all 50 states and local attitudes cannot alter fundamental constitutional rights.
• Plain Text vs. Historical Tradition In this case the critical methodological point was reaffirmed by the Court: the Bruen two-step analysis requires courts to first assess whether a law clashes with the plain text of the Second Amendment (a linguistics inquiry), and only then assess historical tradition — with the burden on the government at the history stage.
• The Big ‘OOPS!’ Lower Courts Caught Smuggling History into Plain Text Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s concurrence (footnote 1) directly addresses and condemns the practice of lower courts — particularly the 4th, 2nd, and 9th Circuits — “smuggling” historical tradition analysis into the plain text stage in order to keep the burden on Second Amendment claimants rather than the government.
We will go into more depth on this extremely important decision for Second Amendment jurisprudence in the next Judicial Report.
