I read the brief but got bogged down in the language . Can someone give us a summary?
Me too.
I'll have to to back and read when I have more time (not sure how much that will help with all the legal stuff), but my two key takeaways were:
1) The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of claims brought against the County of Hawaii, dismissed plaintiff’s appeal as to the State of Hawaii, and remanded, in plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the denial of his application for a handgun license violated his Second Amendment right to carry a loaded firearm in public for self-defense.
2) The panel acknowledged that while the concealed carry of firearms categorically falls outside Second Amendment protection, see Peruta v. County of San Diego, 824 F.3d 919, 939 (2016) (en banc), it was satisfied that the Second Amendment encompasses a right to carry a firearm openly in public for self-defense.
So good in pursuit of right for open carry, it sort of concedes that "concealed carry of firearms categorically falls OUTSIDE Second Amendment protection".
Probably not that simple, but still a good and hard fought win.