The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday on Hawaii’s strict concealed carry law and things got heated — and possibly racist — when the state’s attorney defended the law using 19th century laws specifically aimed at preventing black Americans from exercising their Second Amendment rights.
The law, which went into effect in 2023, prohibits people from carrying a firearm into a private business or property like a restaurant, store, or office building without first getting permission from the owner.
Other states like Texas allow gun owners to have their firearms in these locations unless the owner posts a sign prohibiting it.
However, Hawaii’s law requires the owner to give clear permission, either verbally or by posting a sign saying firearms are allowed. If this is not the case, the law assumes guns are not allowed on the property. Also, gun owners can’t carry their weapons in “sensitive places” like schools, government buildings, and hospitals.
The intent behind the law was to make it nearly impossible for people to carry their concealed firearms outside of their homes.
Neal Katyal, the attorney representing Hawaii, cited an 1865 Louisiana law as historical proof that states can restrict guns on private property. However, this law was part of the “Black Codes,” racist laws that Southern states passed to prevent newly-freed slaves from keeping and bearing arms.
Allow me to save you some time, Mr. Justice: because the people citing the Black Codes are racist a-holes who should be ignored. pic.twitter.com/B3SpgwRviB
— Kirk Freeman (@KirkFreemanLaw) January 20, 2026
The 1865 law prohibited freedmen from carrying guns on private property without the consent of the owner. It also barred interracial marriage and forced them to pay special taxes.
After the Civil War concluded in 1865, these states panicked at the prospect of former slaves having equal rights. So they passed legislation called “Black Codes” to control black people’s lives and keep them working on plantations for little pay.
Mississippi’s Black Code, for example, mandated that “no freedman, free negro or mulatto” could “keep or carry firearms of any kind” without obtaining permission from local police, which rarely obliged. Those who violated the law could be fined and imprisoned.
Katyal claimed the Louisiana law was valid because it was “race neutral on its face” because it didn’t explicitly mention black people. “The black codes are undoubtedly a shameful period in our nation's history," he admitted, but argued that it could still count as a valid historical precedent.
The Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling on New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen established a test that each existing or new gun control must pass to be considered constitutional. There must be a similar law passed during the Founding or Reconstruction eras.
Katyal further claimed that when Congress readmitted Louisiana into the Union in 1868, it did not strike down the law.
Then, the attorney made the ridiculous claim that the law actually protected black Americans by preventing armed people away from black-owned property and claimed it defended property rights.
Yet, we already saw how effective those laws were at keeping the KKK from harassing and attacking black people in the South, didn’t we?
Fortunately, several Supreme Court Justices weren’t buying what Katyal was selling.
Justice Neil Gorsuch told Katyal, “You rely very heavily on an 1865 black code law in Louisiana. You say it's a dead ringer" for Hawaii's law. Gorsuch continued, noting that the law "was adopted immediately after the Civil War as part of an effort, it appears, to disarm black people. A Reconstruction governor later explained that this law, of course, was aimed at the freedmen."
"Do you think the black codes, as they're called, should inform this Court's decision-making when trying to discern what is this nation's traditions?" Gorsuch asked?
Justice Samuel Alito said it was “the height of irony to cite a law that was enacted for exactly the purpose of preventing someone from exercising the Second Amendment right” and explained that the Black Codes were designed to “disarm the black population in order to help the [Ku Klux] Klan terrorize them.”
Brown Jackson: I don’t understand how anybody could argue against using Black Codes to justify Hawaii’s gun control law! We are supposed to focus on the history and tradition.
— Rebecca Tucker (@RebeccaTucker85) January 20, 2026
Deputy Solicitor General: Those were ruled unconstitutional 150+ years ago. Those should not be used to… pic.twitter.com/lq40K6QxG6
Alan Beck, the lawyer challenging Hawaii’s law savaged Katyal’s use of the Black Codes. "The 1865 law was expressly passed to discriminate against African Americans that were newly freed slaves," he told the court. "And I just don't see how a law like that can be used" to justify a modern regulation.
Based on the oral arguments, the Supreme Court’s six conservative justices appear ready to strike down Hawaii’s law. But they will not issue their ruling until late June.
There have been other cases where leftists have tried using Black Codes to justify gun control, which reveals a staggering level of hypocrisy. These are the same people who will claim school choice is wrong because some used it to discriminate against black students. They cast themselves as allies to black Americans when, in reality, they seek to exploit them to violate everyone’s rights.
Gun control has always been racist — and it still is. The fact that an anti-gunner lawyer would even dare to use the Black Codes to justify violating the Second Amendment is clear proof.