In 2022, the Supreme Court unleashed chaos on the nation’s lower courts. In their decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the six Republican justices instructed judges that they now needed to interpret Second Amendment cases in a new way.
The problem, as Ian Milhiser writes, is that their guidance is extraordinarily unclear, leading one Trump judicial appointee to complain that Bruen’s “inconsistent and amorphous standard” has “created mountains of work for district courts.” Now, SCOTUS is aiming to provide some clarity in a new case it’s hearing next week known as Wolford v. Lopez, in which three gun owners and a pro-gun advocacy group are challenging a state gun law in Hawaii. Millhiser explains why the Court may just have to admit that its confusing reasoning in Bruen has failed — and why it could be forced to deliver a rare blow to gun rights under the 2022 ruling. Either way, Wolford could be an embarrassing case for the justices. But they only have themselves to blame.
This kind of work is made possible by our Vox Members. If you would like to support Vox’s independent journalism, please consider becoming a Vox Member today.
—Seth Maxon, politics, policy, and ideas editor
