Wolford v. Lopez · ¶173

At step two, the majority again misapprehends this Court’s precedents. It observes that many of the analogues discuss unauthorized hunting—and goes no further, essentially requiring a “dead ringer” for Hawaii’s law. Ante, at 19–22. But Rahimi demands more effort. The lack of an exact match cannot be dispositive; instead, the majority should have searched for the animating principles in Hawaii’s analogues. 602 U. S., at 691. The majority’s arguments for why Hawaii’s analogues are insufficient do not follow from Rahimi’s reasoning.

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