Hawaii's Highest State Court Objects to the Supreme Court's Gun Rulings

Delivering a biting criticism, the state’s supreme court sharply declared, “There is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public.”

No Right to Public Gun Carriage?

It’s rare for blue states to confront the federal authority or launch initiatives against federal legislation, a practice more associated with Texas.

Blue States’ Growing Frustration

As the US Supreme Court’s six Republican members increasingly take on the role of shaping national laws, the dissatisfaction in blue states is escalating.

This was demonstrated last week in Hawaii, where frustration boiled over like lava from an enraged volcano.

Hawaii vs. SCOTUS

Law, court, SCOTUS — Image via Shutterstock.com

Just a day prior to the Supreme Court, viewed favorably by some, hearing a case involving a presidential aspirant with a background in insurrection, Hawaii’s highest state court openly expressed its frustration with the Supreme Court’s actions.

Declaring Autonomy

Judge with gavel and papers sitting at wooden table against light grey background, closeup — Illustration. Image by Depositphotos.com

On February 7, in a unanimous verdict, the Hawaii Supreme Court declared its independence from feeling obliged to follow the precedent set by the nation’s highest court, indicating a lack of even basic respect.

Historical Basis

Illustration. Image by Depositphotos.com

“The text and purpose of the Hawaiʻi Constitution, and Hawaiʻi’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, do not support a constitutional right to carry deadly weapons in public,” states Justice Todd Eddins in the court’s ruling.

Theory vs. Practice

Comparing, Scale, Balls, — Image by DepositPhotos.com

Eddins elaborates further, asserting that “conventional interpretive modalities and Hawaiʻi’s historical tradition of firearm regulation rule out an individual right to keep and bear arms under the Hawaiʻi Constitution.”

Firearm Rights

Illustration. Image credit: Depositphotos

Hawaii’s laws “allow a person to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home if they have a license,” Eddins points out, without addressing the practical feasibility of obtaining or utilizing this license.

Constitutional Limits

The court interprets Article I, Section 17, adopted in 1950 and similar in wording to the Second Amendment, as not imposing limitations on gun control in Hawaii, as it does not affirm an individual right.

Ruling Rejected

By rejecting a resident’s claim of a constitutional right to carry a firearm without a state permit, as argued under Bruen, Hawaii effectively dismisses the Bruen decision within its jurisdiction.

Interpretation Challenged

Illustration. Image credit: Shutterstock

The critique gains significance considering the parallel language in Hawaii’s constitution and the US Constitution’s Second Amendment.

Misreading the Second Amendment?

Essentially, the Hawaii court is suggesting that the US Supreme Court has misinterpreted the Second Amendment, leading Hawaii to disregard the higher court’s approach.

Gun Rights History

Illustration of a book on a table in a library — Illustration. Image credit: Shutterstock

Justices Scalia and Thomas navigated around complex terms like “well-regulated militia,” significantly altering the government’s role in ensuring public safety.

18th Century Views

Their focus was on “history and tradition,” suggesting that practices suitable for armed White individuals in the 18th century should apply to modern times, despite the drastically different context of contemporary firearm violence.

Historians Challenge Rulings

Lawyer, writing — Image by Depositphotos.com

Historians still continue to challenge and discredit the justices’ selective and novice interpretation of gun rights history. Their rulings, built on unstable intellectual grounds, face increasing scrutiny and criticism from additional historical research.

Judicial ‘Irony’

Dishonest businessman telling lies, lying businessperson holding fingers crossed behind his back. Lie — Illustration. Image credit: Depositphotos

Saul Cornell, a Fordham University historian specializing in American gun regulation history, points out the irony: “The great irony is that a court that invokes history has repeatedly demonstrated a very poor grasp of history and no appreciation of their own place in history,”

Bold Critique of SCOTUS

According to the critical judgment from Hawaii’s high court claims, the U.S. Supreme Court “distorts and cherry-picks historical evidence. It shrinks, alters, and discards historical facts that don’t fit. History by historians quickly debunked Heller’s history.”

Hawaii’s Success

The opinion further states, “The United States Supreme Court disables the states’ responsibility to protect public safety, reduce gun violence, and safeguard peaceful public movement,”

Second-Lowest Gun Death Rate

“A government by the people works. Hawaiʻi’s legislative branch has passed sensible firearms laws. And Hawaiʻi’s executive branch has enforced those laws,” Hawaii’s opinion continues, “The most recent available data from the Centers for Disease Control shows that Hawaiʻi has the nation’s second-lowest rate of gun deaths per year.”