Hawaii Rifle Association

We need your help.

https://www.zeffy.com/en-US/donation-form/yututake-v-lopez-donations

The Ninth Circuit recently issued a decision in Yukutake v. Lopez that sets a troubling precedent regarding fi***rm registration requirements. In its ruling, the court concluded that fi***rm registration requirements are not subject to the historical-tradition analysis required under New York State R***e & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

The practical concern is significant: if fi***rm registration requirements are treated differently from other regulations affecting the right to keep and bear arms, states may have substantially greater latitude to impose additional requirements, burdens, or costs through the registration process.

We believe this precedent MUST be challenged.

We are raising funds to cover the legal costs of seeking review by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). While there is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will agree to hear the case, this petition provides an important opportunity to challenge the Ninth Circuit’s decision before Hawaii and other states use this precedent to impose increasingly burdensome fi***rm-registration requirements.

Without meaningful constitutional limits, those requirements could make the registration process increasingly costly, complicated, and difficult for ordinary citizens to navigate.

Legal challenges at this level are expensive, and every contribution helps.

Anything you can spare matters. Thank you for your support.

Yututake v. Lopez Donations We need your help.The Ninth Circuit recently issued a decision in Yukutake v. Lopez that sets a troubling precedent regarding fi***rm registration…

Congrats Attorney Alan Beck!

I was honored to be awarded the 2026 Defender of the Constitution award this weekend at the Gun Rights Policy Conference. I really enjoyed meeting many like minded patriots at the event. Thank you to the Second Amendment Foundation for hosting the event and giving me the award.

Come see us at the gun show!

Come check us out!

What Does Dangerous And Unusual Actually Mean? The Assault Weapon Ban Case Explained The Supreme Court just took a case about assault weapon bans, and t...

Analysis: The ‘Dangerous and Unusual’ Standard is About Conduct, Not Weapons Themselves The Supreme Court’s latest Second Amendment case, Viramontes v. Cook County, is likely to come down to whether AR-15s are “dangerous and unusual” weapons.

Examining the Pro-Gun Briefs in the SCOTUS AR-15 Case (Ft. @BearingArmsCamCo) This week, we're taking a look at the briefs backing the plaintiffs...

Today my cocounsel in Wolford, Kevin O’Grady, filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Hawaii fi****ms Coalition (HIFICO). Much of his brief focuses on the effort by courts and governments to eliminate all weapons that are not specifically limited to "personal defense" and which might support "militia" purposes. That is, to the government, your revolver is good for self defense, but not so great as a militia or "military style" weapon, so it's ok, but a "militia" or "military style" weapon is not great for individual self defense, but is geared toward the "military" so, it is not protected at all. Since the whole STATED purpose of the Second Amendment was to preserve a "well regulated" (which means well armed and trained, not controlled), "militia" you cannot possibly remove "militia" style weapons from the people. You can read his brief at the link below.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-238/422957/20260903160437731_25-566%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf