Hawaii’s rules for gun buyers were upheld by a federal appeals court on Sept. 22 in a ruling that reversed a lower court’s injunction.
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii in a 6–5 vote.
In Todd Yukutake and David Kikukawa v. Anne Lopez and the City and County of Honolulu, the court found that the law imposing a list of rules on gun buyers is constitutional under the June 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.
Writing for the majority of the Ninth Circuit’s en banc panel, Judge John B. Owens stated that a footnote in the Bruen decision holds that objective, “shall-issue” licensing standards comply with the Second Amendment.
A “shall-issue” standard means that the state must grant a permit to a qualified applicant.
The dissenting judges say this is a misapplication of the Bruen standard.
The law in question requires a state-issued license to purchase a handgun. The licensing process requires applicants to submit fingerprints, a mental health check, and their Social Security number. It also sets a 30-day limit for purchasing the gun once the license is issued. If the licensee fails to meet that deadline, the process must be restarted.
Once the firearm purchase is complete, the new gun owner is required to provide information about the gun to the police department. Under some circumstances the gun must be inspected by the police.
Under Bruen, a gun law is constitutional if it fits the plain text of the Second Amendment and has a historical analogue from the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification.
The majority wrote that footnote nine of the Bruen decision allows requiring a license to carry a handgun in public for protection as long as the licensing requirements are based on objective standards.
Owens wrote that the plaintiffs failed to show that the law effectively denied them their Second Amendment rights or impeded their ability to acquire firearms. He stated that, according to footnote nine, “non-abusive, shall-issue laws comport with the Second Amendment.”
Joining Owens in reversing the injunction were Chief Judge Mary H. Murguia and judges Kim McLane Wardlaw, Jacqueline H. Nguyen, Gabriel P. Sanchez, and Holly A. Thomas.
Judge Ryan Nelson joined Judges Daniel Bress, Lawrence VanDyke, Bridget Bade, and Danielle J. Forrest in dissenting in part.
The dissenters wrote that footnote nine does not apply because it covers the carrying of a firearm and not the acquisition of one. They also noted that the state did not identify a historical analog for the licensing requirement.
The lawsuit was filed in 2019 by the Honolulu County residents. The pair said the licensing process was an unconstitutional infringement on their Second Amendment rights. In August 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii found in their favor.
Gun rights activists say this is not the end of the case. Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, called the decision a “roadmap for abusing gun owners.”
Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, vowed to continue the legal fight.
“This case will be headed to the Supreme Court and I believe that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will be overturned,” Gottlieb stated in an email to The Epoch Times.
