As the justices declined to review a decision by the liberal state’s top court that condemned an expansion of gun rights by the country’s highest court, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied a Hawaii man’s attempt to have criminal charges against him for carrying a pistol while hiking dismissed.

After being charged in 2017 with breaking state laws that prohibit individuals from carrying firearms and ammunition outside of their homes without a license, Christopher Wilson, the man, appealed the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision to reinstate the charges against him. That court decision was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

When Wilson was arrested for carrying a.22-caliber handgun on private property in the West Maui mountains, he claimed that the charges against him violated his rights under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s historic 2022 decision in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, which acknowledged for the first time a person’s right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, further supported Wilson’s claim that his actions were lawful. The conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court is 6-3.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s expansion of Second Amendment rights, and specifically the logic in the Bruen decision, was criticized by the Hawaii Supreme Court in its ruling. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in significant cases since 2008 that the Second Amendment guarantees a person’s right to keep and bear arms, including in public, the state constitution’s nearly identical clause does not, the Hawaii court wrote.

A “collective, militia” view of gun rights is supported by Hawaii’s constitution, according to the state court, which also stated that “there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public.”

According to the Hawaiian court, the U.S. Supreme Court “discards historical facts that don’t fit” and “distorts and cherry-picks historical evidence” in order to justify its emphasis on individual rights. In its ruling, the state court made reference to the Bruen ruling, which ordered lower courts to overturn gun control laws if they were “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The Hawaii court referred to that as a “fuzzy” test because it relies on a “liberty-reducing” interpretive approach that incorrectly uses historical precedent to dictate contemporary life.

” It is risky to examine the federal constitution by going back in time to 1791 or 1868 to see how a state regulates deadly weapons in accordance with the democratic design of the Constitution. “The Constitution is not a’suicide pact,'” the state court wrote.

Although he supported the decision to reject Wilson’s appeal for procedural reasons, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the Bruen ruling, said in a statement on Monday that the Hawaii Supreme Court “failed to give the Second Amendment its due regard.” Justice Samuel Alito, a fellow conservative, joined him in his statement.

Wilson was arrested by police after he and a few friends went hiking on private property close to Maalaea, Hawaii, to observe the moon and native plants.

Prosecutors said Wilson was charged with violating laws that forbid carrying a firearm and ammunition outside of one’s home without a license.

Wilson claimed that these accusations went against both the federal and state constitutions’ guarantees of his right to keep and bear arms. In agreement, a state trial judge dismissed those charges. However, in February, the Hawaii Supreme Court reversed that decision.

Several conservative and pro-gun rights organizations endorsed Wilson’s appeal in their petitions.