WASHINGTON — Do licensed gun owners have a right to carry a loaded weapon into stores, restaurants and other private places that are open to the public?
California and Hawaii are among five states with new laws that forbid carrying firearms onto private property without the consent of an owner or manager. But the Trump administration joined gun-rights advocates on Tuesday in urging the Supreme Court to strike down these laws as unconstitutional under the 2nd Amendment.
Such a law “effectively nullifies licenses to carry arms in public,” Trump’s lawyers said.
If you “stop at a gasoline station, you are committing a crime,” Deputy Solicitor Gen. Sarah Harris told the court.
An attorney representing Hawaii said the issue is one of property rights, not gun rights.
“An invitation to shop is not an invitation to bring your Glock,” Washington attorney Neal Katyal told the court. “There is no constitutional right to enter property that includes a right to bring firearms.”
The justices sounded split along the usual ideological lines, with the court’s conservatives signaling they are likely to strike down the new laws in five Democratic-led states.
“You are relegating the 2nd Amendment to second-class status,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. told Katyal.
He said the court had ruled law-abiding persons have a right to carry a firearm for self-defense when they leave home. That would include going to stores or businesses that are open to the public.
“If the owners don’t like guns, why don’t they just put up a sign?” Alito said.
Both sides agreed that business owners are generally free to allow or prohibit guns on their property. However, state officials said, the laws are important because business owners rarely post signs that either welcome or forbid the carrying of guns.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the 2nd Amendment should have the same standing as the 1st Amendment.
He said it was understood based on the 1st Amendment that a political candidate may walk up to a house and knock on the door or drop off a pamphlet. He questioned why the court should uphold a law that limits gun owners from entering places that are open to the public.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh said they too believed the “right to keep and bear arms” included the right to carry weapons, including into stores.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson said property rights should prevail over gun rights.
“Is there a right to go on private property with a gun?” Sotomayor asked repeatedly. She said the court had never upheld such a broad right.
But with the possible exception of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, none of the conservatives agreed.
Four years ago, the court ruled law-abiding gun owners had a right to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense when they left home. They also said then that guns may be prohibited in “sensitive places” but they did not decide what that meant.
In the wake of that decision, California, Hawaii, New York, New Jersey and Maryland adopted new laws that restricted carrying guns in public places, including parks and beaches.
The laws also said gun owners may not take a gun into a privately owned business without the “express authorization” of an owner or manager. California’s law went a step further and said the owner must post a clear sign allowing guns.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the laws from Hawaii and California, except for the required posting of a sign in California.
Three Hawaii residents with concealed carry permits appealed to the Supreme Court and won the backing of the Trump administration.
The post Supreme Court appears likely to strike down California law banning guns in stores and restaurants appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
