Hawaii’s Supreme Court overturned a ruling by a lower judge that Hawaii was subject to federal law and Supreme Court precedent. The Court found that the Supreme Court erred in its ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Justice Todd Eddins, writing for the unanimous court, said: “We hold there is no constitutional right of the state in Hawaii to be able to carry a firearm in public.”

The court reached this conclusion when it reversed a lower court’s decision dismissing two charges against Christopher Wilson. Wilson had been arrested after trespassing on another’s property with a gun that was not registered.

Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez, a Democrat, hailed the ruling as a landmark affirming the constitutionality of gun safety legislation.

Benjamin Lowenthal and his colleagues are “taking stock” with their options, and re-evaluating the decision.

A trial judge determined that the charges brought against Wilson violated his Second Amendment rights to bear and maintain arms, in light of the landmark decision by the U.S. Supreme Court New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen 2022.

The original reason that Mr. Wilson carried an “unregistered gun” was left unchanged by the court. Hawaii continues to use the “may issue” system, which Bruen outlawed.

Data from Hawaii shows that the police chiefs issued only six carry permits in the 21 years before the decision.

Since the decision, Maui County only approved one permit request. Alana Pico confirmed the approval of one application but did not respond immediately to a public information request.

The court, while declaring that Heller and Bruen had been wrongly decided, and Hawaii’s understanding of what the US Constitution meant, took a swipe against the Dobbs ruling, which found infanticide to be not a Constitutionally protected activity. The Supreme Court was accused of historical fiction.

The opinion of a court is not taken seriously. The quote is from The Wire an HBO series that criticizes originalism. “The old days are just that… old times. ”

I’m not sure why I am so upset.

Hawaii Court’s opinion could have been written exactly as is, but they added a paragraph/sentence at the end that began with “Nevertheless” and explained how the SCOTUS rulings on Breun & Heller obliged them to uphold the lower court decisions dismissing charges.

They could have written for 50 pages even if they didn’t like it and still respected the Constitutional Order of Things.

They have just set themselves on fire.