Wolford v. Lopez · ¶103

What, then, is the regulatory principle that justified these laws? Some might zero in on the fact that they targeted poaching and conclude that a modern law is not “relevantly similar” if it addresses something other than hunting. Cf. Brief for Petitioners 33–34. That focus, however, is too narrow. Colonial legislatures targeted poaching because that was the particular misconduct that they happened to confront. But “[t]he regulatory challenges posed by firearms today are not always the same as those that preoccupied” earlier generations. Bruen, 597 U. S., at 27. Today, the right to bear arms is misused in other ways that were unknown to our forebears but pose an equivalent risk to persons or property. The antipoaching laws support the principle that when a State identifies specific places that are prone to particular “abuse[s]” of the right, W. Rawle, View of the Constitution of the…

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.