Second Amendment Update; Open Carry of Firearms

In a lengthy (127-page) split (7-to-4) opinion, an en banc (11 justice) panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed its earlier three-judge opinion (at 896 F.3rd 1044 [9th Cir. July 24, 2018]; see California Legal Update, Vol. 23 #9, July 29, 2018.) and upheld the constitutionality of a Hawaii “open carry” statute (Hawai’i Revised Statutes § 134-9(a)). (Young v. Hawaii (9th Cir. Mar. 24, 2021) __ F.3rd __ [2021 U.S.App. LEXIS 8571].) The statute in issue requires its residents seeking a license to “openly carry” firearms in public to meet certain requirements.  Specifically, an applicant for such a permit must (1) demonstrate “the urgency or the need” to carry a firearm, (2) be of good moral character, and (3) be “engaged in the protection of life and property.” In this case, appellant George Young had applied for a firearm open-carry license relying simply upon his general desire to carry a firearm for self-defense.  The state denied his application, telling him that he had failed to show an “urgency or . . . need.”  Filing suit in federal court, and arguing that Hawaii’s statute violated the Second Amendment (as well as the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause; an argument the Court rejected as “premature” and not currently in issue), the district court disagreed with Young and upheld the ....