Will Baude

So there, there are these laws that say you can't carry guns on enclosed or approved land at the owner's permission.

A surprising number of them, actually.

It's like, you know, the court says you've got to find a law like this.

And look, New Jersey did it.

Look, Louisiana did it.

And the argument of the challengers is, well, those are different because those are anti-poaching laws that only apply to enclosed lands.

And Justice Barrett asked, more or less, okay, well, suppose it's true that those are anti-poaching laws.

Does that mean that under our history and tradition, you can only regulate, you can only flip the default rule to stop poaching?

Or does that mean you can flip the default rule to stop a major social problem the legislature believes is a problem?

For instance, she says, what if Hawaii had a rash of gas station robberies?

And they said gas station robberies are the 21st century equivalent of poaching.

Like, it's a problem.

And to stop it, we need to flip the default by saying no guns at gas stations unless the, you know, store owner says you can.

The challenger, at least Alan Beck, said, no, you know, you can't do that.

That would be unconstitutional.

You can't regulate gas station robberies the way you could regulate poaching.

But I'm not sure that's right.

No.

Squishy?

I think this is a case where different justices have different things they care about.