The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its ruling in Wolford v. Lopez on August 10, 2026, after the Supreme Court overturned its original decision, forcing the California-based court to deliver a rare Second Amendment victory.
The case challenged Hawaii’s 2023 Act 52, a sweeping post-Bruen statute that restricted the carry of firearms in numerous “sensitive places” and created a default ban on carrying firearms onto the private property of another person unless the owner, lessee, operator, or manager gives express authorization—verbal, written, or via clear signage. That private-property default rule is codified at Hawaii Revised Statutes § 134-9.5. Critics quickly labeled it the “vampire rule,” because it flipped the longstanding common-law presumption: instead of allowing licensed carriers to enter businesses open to the public unless prohibited, the law made every private commercial property off-limits unless the owner affirmatively invited armed citizens inside.
Gun Owners Challenged Hawaii’s Default Carry Ban
The Hawaii Firearms Coalition teamed up with local residents Jason and Alison Wolford and Atom Kasprzycki to sue the state. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of a regulation they viewed as unconstitutional, which they argued effectively nullified the right to bear arms for self-defense in everyday life. The U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii granted the injunction in part, blocking the private-property default rule as applied to property open to the public and certain other provisions.
On the first appeal, a Ninth Circuit panel in 2024 affirmed some parts of the injunction but reversed others. Most critically, the panel held that the plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on the private-property default rule under § 134-9.5. That ruling left the “vampire rule” largely intact and drew sharp criticism from Second Amendment advocates who viewed the Ninth Circuit as consistently hostile to gun rights.
The plaintiffs filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. The Court granted review limited to the private-property question, reversed the Ninth Circuit, and remanded the case (Wolford v. Lopez). In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the Court held that Hawaii’s rule prohibiting licensed concealed-carry holders from carrying on private property open to the public without the owner’s express authorization violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The majority emphasized that the restriction falls within the plain text of the Second Amendment and that Hawaii had failed to identify a relevant historical tradition supporting such a broad default ban. Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Barrett joined a concurrence by Justice Barrett on part of the analysis. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson dissented.
Ninth Circuit Reinstates the Injunction
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to proceed consistent with its opinion. On remand, the same panel has now affirmed the district court’s injunction against HRS § 134-9.5—the private-property default rule—and portions of HRS § 134-9.1(a)(1) that prohibit carry in certain parking areas owned, leased, or used by the State or a county. Specifically, the injunction continues to block restrictions on parking areas shared with non-governmental entities, not reserved for government employees, or not exclusively serving a government building. The panel left its prior analysis of other sensitive-place restrictions largely undisturbed.
The decision marks a significant, if limited, Second Amendment win in a circuit long regarded as openly hostile to the right to keep and bear arms. Similar “default no-carry” laws in California, New York, New Jersey, and Maryland are now under heightened scrutiny. While the case remains at the preliminary-injunction stage and further litigation is expected, the Supreme Court’s clear rejection of Hawaii’s “vampire rule” has already reshaped the legal landscape for public carry nationwide.
About John Crump
Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @right2bear, or at www.crumpy.com.
