US appeals court partially reinstates Hawaii and California firearm carry restrictions News
Brett_Hondow / Pixabay
US appeals court partially reinstates Hawaii and California firearm carry restrictions

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Friday partially reinstated 2023 laws in Hawaii and California banning the carry of firearms in certain “sensitive places.”

After the laws’ passage, the “sensitive place” designations were subsequently challenged as violating the US Constitution’s Second Amendment, which establishes the right to keep and bear arms. US district courts then temporarily blocked the laws in both states while the merits of the constitutional challenges are examined in future proceedings.

After the district courts’ injunctions were appealed, the Ninth Circuit confirmed that carry in some “sensitive areas,” such as bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, remains temporarily barred but reinstated the ability to carry in other venues.

Judge Susan Graber, writing for a unanimous court, set out the following:

For Hawaii, the carry of firearms will be prohibited in bars and restaurants that serve alcohol; at beaches, parks, and similar areas; and in parking areas adjacent to all of those places. It is also illegal in Hawaii to carry firearms onto private property without consent.

However, gun owners will be allowed to carry their weapons in financial institutions, parking lots adjacent to financial institutions, and parking lots shared by government buildings and non-governmental buildings.

In California, the carry of firearms remains banned in places including bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, playgrounds, youth centers,  parks, athletic areas, casinos, stadiums, public libraries, amusement parks museums, and parking areas connected to those places.

The court blocked the enforcement of California’s “sensitive areas” carry ban in hospitals, public transit, permitted gatherings, and financial institutions.

One reason for the different outcomes in Hawaii and California is that the 2022 US Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen required governments to justify modern firearm regulation by finding a “historical analogue.” If “relevantly similar” regulation did not exist, then that area or place has presumptive Second Amendment protection.