Wolford v. Lopez · ¶153

Thus, under Bruen and Heller, the Court must consult the historical record to determine whether the plain text of the Second Amendment was originally understood to guarantee armed carry onto private property with presumed implied consent as the default, impervious to state regulation altering the form of that consent—i. e., the constitutional right petitioners claim. For the reasons I have already explained in Part II–B, supra, history clearly demonstrates that the Second Amendment has never been understood to protect such conduct.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.