Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii’s “no-carry-by-default” gun rule for stores and hotels

On June 25, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court in Wolford v. Lopez struck down a Hawaii law that barred licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public unless the property owner gave express, affirmative consent.

What the Supreme Court held

The Court held that Hawaii’s default “permission required” framework violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. It reversed the lower court and sent the case back for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

How Hawaii’s rule worked (plain English)

Under Hawaii’s approach, permit holders could not assume they were welcome with a handgun on private property that is open to the public (including places like stores and hotels) unless the owner clearly communicated that guns are allowed.

Why the Court said Hawaii’s rule failed

The opinion applies the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment framework using the amendment’s text and an evidence-based historical analysis. The Court concluded that the restrictions imposed by Hawaii’s “express and affirmative” default rule were not supported by sufficient historical analogues under that method.

Practical impact: what changes for shoppers and businesses

After Wolford, the “default” shifts away from requiring permission from businesses for gun-carry in places open to the public. Reporting on the decision also emphasized that owners still retain authority to exclude guns from their own property by clearly banning them—meaning businesses that want to be gun-free can still post and enforce that choice.

What comes next

Because the Supreme Court reversed and remanded, the case returns to the lower courts for proceedings consistent with the opinion. In parallel, lawmakers in other states are reassessing firearm rules that attempt to keep guns out of private, public-facing venues by building similar default-exclusion structures into state law.

What the decision does not settle

Wolford is specifically about Hawaii’s permission-by-default structure for private property open to the public. It does not automatically eliminate every possible firearms restriction in every setting; compliance and any replacement rules are likely to turn on how closely a new regulation tracks the decision’s reasoning and the type of property and restriction involved.

Sources

• U.S. Supreme Court opinion: Wolford et al. v. Lopez (No. 24-1046), slip opinion PDF
• AP News: Supreme Court strikes down Hawaii law requiring permission to carry guns in stores and hotels
• Hawai‘i Public Radio: Explainer on Hawaii’s “vampire rule” and the ruling’s context
• Axios: What Wolford v. Lopez signals for other states’ firearms laws