THE CENTER SQUARE—The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Tuesday in a case over whether states can prevent concealed carry holders on private property that is open to the public. Wolford v. Lopez challenges a Hawaii law that prevents concealed carry permit holders from bringing handguns to beaches, bars, restaurants that serve alcohol and gas stations without the owners permission. The Hawaii law stems from the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, where justices struck down a New York law requiring concealed carry holders to display the need to defend themselves. “The Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court’s 2022 decision. Thomas further elaborated that gun restrictions should only be upheld if they are consistent with the “historical tradition” of the United States. In 2023, Hawaii implemented a law making it a misdemeanor for concealed carry holders to bring a gun on private property. The misdemeanor carries a sentence of up to a year in prison. Hawaii residents with concealed-carry permits challenged the state’s law. The residents, alongside a gun-rights group, argued that the government has no imperative to prohibit citizens from carrying concealed weapons in public spaces. “There is no comparable historical—or even modern-day—tradition of allowing the government to create a no-carry default rule for private property open to the public,” lawyers for the residents wrote to the Supreme Court. Lawyers for the gun-rights group also pointed to the disproportionate effect Hawaii’s law will have on rural areas with parks and beaches. “These bans are applicable to hundreds of thousands of acres of public land throughout Hawaii, even though the State allows hunting with firearms in many areas of these parks and forests,” lawyers wrote in a petition to the court. In a brief to the Supreme Court, Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez said the state instituted its law to protect citizens from hosting armed individuals on private property. Lopez points to a longstanding history of limiting the right of Hawaiian citizens to carry weapons in public spaces. “Property owners in Hawai’i could assume that—unless they made express arrangements to the contrary—firearms would not be carried onto their property, even if it was open to the public,” Lopez wrote in a brief to the nation’s highest court. Lawyers for Hawaii also argue that the Second Amendment, at the time of the nation’s founding, did not include the right to enter private property with a weapon. “The Founders recognized a property owner’s right to exclude,” the lawyers wrote. “Accordingly, at the Founding, a person had no right to enter private property with a gun unless he had the owner’s express consent or an implied license based on local law or custom.” In lower court litigation, Hawaii pointed to a 1771 New Jersey law and an 1865 Louisiana law that explicitly required consent before entering a private property of any kind with a gun. Lower courts upheld Hawaii’s arguments on the basis of these laws. “The overall purpose of all the laws was plainly to protect a property owner’s right to exclude firearms,” lawyers for Hawaii wrote. “Variation in the specific reasons why owners might wish to preclude guns—from preventing unwanted hunting to promoting safety, comfort or self-defense—does not undermine the basic fact that laws that vindicate the fundamental right to exclude are well within the tradition of American firearm regulation.” Lawyers for the concealed-carry holders argued Hawaii relied on faulty evidence to assert other laws were similar to the state’s ban. They argued certain public spaces, like beaches and public parks, would not be considered in the original bans, which fundamentally alters the state’s argument. “Under that approach, ‘the original understanding of the Second Amendment,’” the lawyers wrote, referencing a lower court judge’s opinion, “‘Would not apply to any new types of public spaces that would develop in the future.’” Gun rights and gun control advocates will be watching as the justices hear arguments in one of the court’s most consequential Second Amendment cases of the year, with a decision expected by July. Originally published by The Center Square. The post US Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Case Tuesday appeared first on The Daily Signal.

While Minneapolis Self Destructs, Memphis Lookin' Pretty Sweet

“Is Margaret Brennan stupid or does she just really hate facts?” the White House’s official “Rapid Response” team asked on X.com Sunday after CBS’s Brennan told DHS Sec. Kristi Noem’s she was wrong about DHS arrests of criminal illegal aliens. On Sunday’s “Face the Nation,” Host Margaret Brennan tried to refute the Department of Homeland Security secretary’s observation that 70% of the illegal aliens arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the second Trump Administration have been criminals. Seven in ten of those who have been arrested by ICE aren’t people who simply broke U.S. immigration law, Sec. Noem explained to Brennan: “Every single individual has committed a crime, but 70% of them have committed or have charges against them on violent crimes, and crimes that they are charged with or have been convicted of that have come from other countries that are here illegally, first of all, and then they have committed a criminal act while they've been here or in their home countries, as well.” “Well, our reporting is that 47%, based on your agency's own numbers, 47% have criminal convictions against them,” Brennan said, trying to claim that DHS’s “own numbers” belie Noem’s 70% statistic. But, Brennan was actually citing her own network’s numbers incorrectly: Sec. Noem was referring to arrests of illegal aliens nationwide during Pres. Trump’s second term in office. Per CBS, Brennan’s statistic refers to all illegal aliens currently in detention who were arrested at any time in the past. Sec. Noem was citing the percentage of illegal aliens arrested who were convicted of, or charged with, crimes – either in the U.S. or in other countries. Per CBS, Brennan’s statistic is for illegal aliens currently in detention – but only those actually convicted of crimes committed in the U.S. – thus excluding those convicted/charged in other countries and those with outstanding charges in the U.S. As a CBS News article updated on Friday explained: “In a statement to CBS News, DHS assistant secretary for public affairs Tricia McLaughlin said 70% of those arrested by ICE under the second Trump administration — not those currently in the agency's custody — have criminal charges or convictions in the U.S. She said those listed as ‘immigration violators’ could have criminal histories abroad or terrorism ties.” “You guys keep changing your percentage,” Sec. Noem told CBS’s Brennan, promising to continue telling the American public the truth about the dangers of illegal immigration in the face of Brennan’s efforts to distort facts in order to attack enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws: “You pick and choose what numbers you think work, but that is the fact, is that 70% of the people that we have detained have charges against them or have been convicted of charges and they need to be brought to justice. “And we're going to keep doing that no matter how much you guys keep lying and don't tell the public the truth.”   President Trump and I will always PROTECT Americans. This administration is committed to arresting and deporting the worst of the worst from America's communities. 70% of those arrested by ICE are convicted criminals or have criminal charges. This includes murderers, pedophiles,… pic.twitter.com/JDFBaAjuF5 — Secretary Kristi Noem (@Sec_Noem) January 18, 2026

The Minnesota Nurses Association asked members to join an "economic blackout" and rally to show opposition to Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations in the state.A statement posted on the MNA website said the organization represents nurses and other health care workers, including "many who are immigrants or have immigrant loved ones directly impacted by ICE enforcement." They also expressed concern for "mixed-status families" who are patients in the health care system. 'ICE should be investigated for human and constitutional violations of Americans and our neighbors.'The statement emphasized, however, that the MNA was not calling for a walkout or work stoppage. An economic blackout means participants cease making purchases in an attempt to force political action through economic pressure. The Trump administration ordered a surge in federal troops to the Minneapolis-St. Paul region of Minnesota in December after continuing evidence of government relief and welfare fraud in the Somali community.Many on the left have accused the administration of being motivated by racism by focusing on fraud committed by some in the ethnic group.The MNA listed the demands of the anti-ICE demonstration that it supports. Organizers called for ICE to leave Minnesota immediately and for the officer who shot and killed activist Renee Good to be "held legally accountable." They also said no "additional federal funding" should be added to the upcoming congressional budget."ICE should be investigated for human and constitutional violations of Americans and our neighbors," they added."As nurses, we cannot be absent when fear is driving people away from care and tearing families apart," said MNA President Chris Rubesch. "Participation in this day is about standing with our patients, our co-workers, and our communities."RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez gets crushed online for her comments about ICE — by outraged liberals President Donald Trump issued his criticism of the Somali community on social media on Thanksgiving Day."Hundreds of thousands of refugees from Somalia are completely taking over the once great State of Minnesota," the president wrote. "Somalian gangs are roving the streets looking for 'prey' as our wonderful people stay locked in their apartments and houses hoping against hope that they will be left alone."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Nobel Foundation said that its Peace Prize was not transferrable after a Venezuelan activist said she offered her prize to President Donald Trump.The president acknowledged the offer in a post on Thursday and said that he had accepted the award from María Corina Machado after meeting with her at the White House.'A laureate is free to keep, give away, sell, or donate these items.'"It was my Great Honor to meet María Corina Machado, of Venezuela, today," he wrote on Truth Social."She is a wonderful woman who has been through so much," he added. "María presented me with her Nobel Peace Prize for the work I have done. Such a wonderful gesture of mutual respect."The Nobel Foundation released a rare statement Monday saying the prize cannot be passed on to someone else."A Nobel Peace Prize laureate receives two central symbols of the prize: a gold medal and a diploma. In addition, the prize money is awarded separately. Regardless of what may happen to the medal, the diploma, or the prize money, it is and remains the original laureate who is recorded in history as the recipient of the prize. Even if the medal or diploma later comes into someone else’s possession, this does not alter who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize," the committee said."A laureate cannot share the prize with others, nor transfer it once it has been announced," they added. "A Nobel Peace Prize can also never be revoked. The decision is final and applies for all time."However, the committee also went on to say there was no restriction on a recipient giving away the award."The Committee does not comment on laureates' subsequent statements, decisions, or actions. Any ongoing assessments or choices made by laureates must be understood as their own responsibility," the committee said. "There are no restrictions in the statutes of the Nobel Foundation on what a laureate may do with the medal, the diploma, or the prize money. This means that a laureate is free to keep, give away, sell, or donate these items."RELATED: Venezuelan freedom fighter wins Nobel Peace Prize — and immediately dedicates it to Trump for his support Machado had presented the award to president for his efforts in helping the people of Venezuela resist the totalitarian Maduro regime."It was a very emotional moment. I decided to present the Nobel Peace Prize medal on behalf of the people of Venezuela," she told Fox News later.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Don Lemon Tries Lecturing Pastor on the First Amendment

Unhinged Liberal Tells Off ‘Fake’ Christians, Dares AG Pam Bondi to Come Get Him

2028 Democrat Hopefuls: 19 Out of 20 Think Biology's Just a Suggestion

Getting the most bang for your buck is the name of the game for many tech consumers. Here's a list of five inexpensive smart TVs that display strong longevity.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who shot and killed protester Renee Good earlier this month appeared to ignore "basic steps" law enforcement are trained to follow, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O'Hara said.