Many gun owners are unaware that Hawaii has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Now, however, thanks to a recent circuit court decision, two of those restrictions have been overturned.
On March 14, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Yukutake v. Lopez upheld a district court ruling striking down two of the provisions to the Aloha State’s gun laws. One involved the very short time (10 days) a firearms purchaser has to buy a gun after receiving the permit required to make a firearms purchase.
“The panel affirmed the district court’s judgment that the short timeframe for completing the purchase of a firearm after obtaining a permit was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment,” the ruling stated. “The purchase and acquisition of firearms is conduct protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment. Because § 134-2(e) regulates conduct covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text, the Second Amendment presumptively protects that conduct. The burden, therefore, fell on the State to justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.”
As the opinion explained, 10 days is a very short period, despite the state arguing otherwise.
“Although the State presumably has a valid interest in ensuring that the background-check results are not stale, the State pointed to no evidence that anything over 10 days or 30 days counts as stale,” the ruling stated. “In Section IV(B)(4) of the opinion, the panel concluded that the temporal limitation was ‘abusive’ within the meaning of Bruen and remanded for the district court to revise its permanent injunction, as appropriate, in light of the recent amendment to § 134-2(e) and to conform to the panel’s ruling.”
The other struck-down provision that was upheld by the circuit court was the requirement for gun buyers to bring their new guns to the police station for an in-person inspection. According to the ruling, this restriction is also overly burdensome and, therefore, unconstitutional.
“Even assuming arguendo that Hawaii’s basic system of registering firearms by owner, type, serial number, etc., was valid under Bruen—a point the panel did not decide—Hawaii’s broad in-person inspection requirement could not be justified as merely a proper ancillary logistical measure in support of such a system,” the ruling stated. “The government failed to point to evidence supporting its conclusion that the addition of a broadly applicable and burdensome physical inspection requirement will materially advance the objectives of the registration system. As with plaintiffs’ challenge to § 134-2(e), the panel remanded to the district court to revise its permanent injunction, as appropriate, in light of the recent amendment to § 134-3 and to conform to the panel’s ruling.”
Lawful Hawaii gun owners shouldn’t begin celebrating too soon, however. It’s likely the state will ask for the entire 9th Circuit to consider the case sometime in the future.
Read the full article here