A new Working Paper by Joseph G.S. Greenlee and George A. Mocsary entitled Vampire Rules, Monarchical Legacies, and Black Codes: Wolford v. Lopez and the Limits of Post-Bruen Evasion is available. The paper’s abstract reads:
This paper proposes that Wolford v. Lopez will test whether New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen meaningfully limits state efforts to preserve pre-Bruen public-carry restrictions through indirect means. It examines Hawaii’s rule, adopted by several states in similar form, that makes it unlawful for licensed individuals to carry firearms on private property open to the public unless the owner gives express permission. The paper contends that this “vampire rule” is not a neutral protection of private property rights, but a state-imposed default that functions as a near-total ban on ordinary public carry. It further argues that historical analogues offered to defend such laws, including monarchical Hawaiian regulations and Reconstruction-era Black Codes, cannot define the lawful scope of the Second Amendment because they reflect disarmament regimes rejected by the American constitutional order. The paper distinguishes permissible owner opt-out rules from unconstitutional state opt-in defaults. States have tools available to protect proprietors’ right to exclude firearms, but they may not redesign the baseline conditions of everyday public life so that exercising an enumerated right depends on universal affirmative permission.
