Wolford v. Lopez · ¶176

In the end, the majority simply refuses to acknowledge that the principles underlying these historical regulations are indistinguishable from the principles underlying Hawaii's. But there is a long historical tradition of States requiring those wishing to carry frearms onto private property to seek the express permission of the property owner and doing so for similar reasons as Hawaii. And if judges may nonetheless reject this lengthy track record because the risks from unauthorized carry were primarily related to hunting in the 18th and 19th centuries—as the majority does—no one can seriously claim that the Bruen test actually constrains judicial discretion.

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