Supreme Court Weighs Hawaii Law Requiring Consent to Carry Guns on Public‑Facing Private Property

The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority pressed Hawaii on Tuesday over a post‑Bruen state law that makes businesses presumptively gun‑free unless owners explicitly consent—verbally or by posted sign—to allow licensed concealed‑carry holders to bring firearms into public‑facing private property such as stores, hotels, gas stations and malls. A group of Maui gun owners argues the statute criminalizes carry based solely on an owner’s silence and relegates the Second Amendment to “second‑class” status, while Hawaii defends the rule as a longstanding exercise of property rights and a default gun‑free presumption in line with its historical weapons limits. Justice Samuel Alito criticized the law as treating gun owners as a disfavored class (“I don’t see how you can get away from that”), whereas Justice Sonia Sotomayor countered that there is no constitutional right to enter private property with a gun absent express or implicit consent. The law, which carries up to a year in prison for violations and mirrors consent‑rules now in California, Maryland, New Jersey and New York, was enacted after the Court’s 2022 Bruen decision required modern gun regulations to fit within the nation’s historical tradition and expanded the right to carry outside the home. The Trump administration is siding with the challengers, telling the Court Hawaii’s regime improperly singles out gun owners, and dozens of states and advocacy groups are watching closely because a ruling could set a nationwide standard for when and how governments can default public‑facing private property to “no guns” without owner opt‑in.