Wolford v. Lopez · ¶152

Rather than respond to Hawaii’s evidence that the right to exclude resolves this case at the first step of Bruen, the majority moves the goal posts. It announces that, at step one, courts must look only to the “plain text” of the Second Amendment devoid of any historical understanding. Ante, at 7, 13. And it rejects Hawaii’s attempts to clarify the meaning of the plain text as it relates to the relevant conduct: carrying a firearm onto private property without express consent. History, according to the majority, is “out of place at Bruen’s first step.” Ante, at 16. Instead, the majority seeks to confine history to Bruen’s second step—when the government must identify a history and tradition that relevantly limits the scope of the Second Amendment right. Ante, at 7–8; see 597 U. S., at 19. This shift is surprising, not only as a matter of precedent but also in light of the majority’s…

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