By Andrew Chung
(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Monday a Hawaii man’s bid to throw out criminal charges for carrying a pistol while hiking, as the justices declined to review a ruling by the liberal-leaning state’s top court that denounced an expansion of gun rights by the nation’s highest judicial body.
The man, Christopher Wilson, had appealed the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision to reinstate the charges against him after he was accused in 2017 of violating state laws restricting people from carrying firearms and ammunition outside the home without a license. The U.S. Supreme Court’s action left that judicial ruling in place.
Wilson argued that the charges brought against him after he was arrested for carrying a .22-caliber handgun on private property in the West Maui mountains violated his rights under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, which protects the right to keep and bear arms.
Wilson also argued that his actions were not illegal under the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 ruling in a case called New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen that recognized for the first time a person’s right to carry a handgun in public for self defense. The U.S. Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority.
The Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision was critical of the U.S. Supreme Court’s widening of rights under the Second Amendment and in particular the reasoning in the Bruen decision. The Hawaii court wrote that while the U.S. Supreme Curt has declared in major rulings since 2008 that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms including in public, the nearly identical provision of the state’s constitution does not.
The state court wrote that Hawaii’s constitution supports a “collective, militia” view of gun rights, and that in its view “there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public.”
The U.S. Supreme Court, the Hawaiian court wrote, “distorts and cherry-picks historical evidence” and “discards historical facts that don’t fit” to support its emphasis on an individual right. The state court decision was alluding to the Bruen decision, which directed lower courts to strike down gun restrictions if they are not “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
The Hawaii court called that a “fuzzy” test based on a “liberty-reducing” interpretative method that wrongly looks to centuries past to control modern life.
“Time-traveling to 1791 or 1868 to collar how a state regulates lethal weapons – per the Constitution’s democratic design – is a dangerous way to look at the federal constitution. The Constitution is not a ‘suicide pact,'” the state court wrote.
On Monday, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who authored the Bruen ruling, wrote in a statement that while he agreed with the decision to deny Wilson’s appeal for procedural reasons, the Hawaii Supreme Court “failed to give the Second Amendment its due regard.” His statement was joined by fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito.
Police arrested Wilson after he and some companions were hiking on private property near Maalaea, Hawaii, to look at the moon and at indigenous plants.
Among the charges he faced, prosecutors said Wilson broke laws that prohibit the carrying of firearms and ammunition outside the home without a license.
Wilson argued that these charges violated his rights to keep and bear arms under the federal and state constitutions. A state trial judge agreed, dismissing those charges. But the Hawaii Supreme Court overturned that decision with its ruling in February.
Wilson’s appeal drew the support of petition is supported by several conservative and gun rights advocacy groups.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung in New York; Editing by Will Dunham)
