Background
Hawaii enacted Act 52 in 2023. The law restricts the carrying of firearms in numerous designated sensitive places and generally bars carrying firearms onto private property unless the property owner permits it.
Several individuals and the Hawaii Firearms Coalition challenged provisions of Act 52 under the Second Amendment and sought a preliminary injunction. The district court granted the request in part, and Hawaii Attorney General Anne E. Lopez appealed.
The Court’s Holding
On remand from the Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction against Hawaii Revised Statutes section 134-9.5, the law’s default rule barring firearm carry on private property without the owner’s permission. The Supreme Court had reversed the Ninth Circuit’s earlier conclusion that the plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on that challenge.
The panel also left its earlier analysis of the other challenged provisions unchanged. It affirmed the injunction as to section 134-9.1(a)(12) and specified portions of section 134-9.1(a)(1) concerning certain government-owned or used parking areas. It reversed the injunction as to sections 134-9.1(a)(4) and (a)(9), and remanded the case.
Key Takeaways
- Hawaii may not enforce its default private-property rule that prohibits firearm carry unless the owner affirmatively allows it, while the preliminary injunction remains in effect.
- The ruling follows the Supreme Court’s reversal of the Ninth Circuit’s prior private-property analysis.
- The panel preserved its prior disposition of the other Act 52 provisions challenged in this appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision restores preliminary injunctive relief against a central feature of Hawaii’s firearms-carry law: its presumption that firearms are prohibited on private property absent owner permission. It also confirms that the Supreme Court’s remand altered only that issue, not the Ninth Circuit’s prior rulings on the remaining sensitive-place restrictions.