Wolford v. Lopez · ¶137

Second, because States have the power to set default consent rules, state law can alter the scope of a license to enter private property. For example, the English rule was that the public had to obtain the owner’s express permission to hunt or fish on “unenclosed” private property. M. Brady, Property v. Guns: The Level-of-Generality Problem in Wol ford, 78 Stan. L. Rev. Online 156, 165 (2026). But some States altered this rule via positive law. See, e.g., Pa. Const., §43 (1776) (“[I]nhabitants of this state shall have liberty to fowl and hunt . . . on all . . . lands . . . not in- closed”); Vt. Const., ch. 2, §39 (1777) (similar). Others retained it or variations on it. See Act of Aug. 23, 1769, 1790 S. C. Pub. L. §3, 276 (prohibiting hunting without license if more than seven miles from home).

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