Article I, § 17 of the Hawaii Constitution states: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

In State v. Mendoza, the Supreme Court of Hawaii rejected an art. I, § 17 challenge to Hawaii Revised Statutes Annotated § 134-4(b) which (along with § 134-2) requires a person to obtain a permit before acquiring any firearm.¹ The court found that the state’s police power allows it to regulate the right to “bear arms” in a reasonable manner, and that the permitting requirement was “rationally related to the legitimate government interest of ensuring that only those who are mature, law abiding, competent citizens possess firearms.”² Although the State v. Mendoza decision was overruled in light of Heller, Hawaii may continue to regulate the right to bear arms in a reasonable manner.³

MEDIA REQUESTS

Our experts can speak to the full spectrum of gun violence prevention issues. Have a question? Email us at media@giffords.org.

Contact

1. 920 P.2d 357 (Haw. 1996).[↩]
2. Mendoza, 920 P.2d at 368.[↩]
3. Lowe v. Kealoha, 2010 Haw. App. LEXIS 866 (Haw. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2010).[↩]