On June 18, the Supreme Court decided United States v. Hemani. The case was 9-0, though was fragmented. Justice Thomas concurred, finding that possession statute exceeded Congress's powers under the Commerce Clause. Justices Jackson and Sotomayor repeated their view that Bruen was wrongly decided. And Justices Alito and Kagan concurred in judgment, though I still am not entirely sure what they disagreed with the majority about.
Today, the Supreme Court decided Wolford v. Lopez. There was a time when we had to wait more than a decade for the Supreme Court to decide a Second Amendment case. This year, we get two victories in the span of a week! Here, the Court split 6-3, finding that Hawaii's "vampire" law violates the Second Amendment.
Justice Alito, who did not join Hemani, wrote the majority opinion in Wolford. Part I of Alito's opinion offers an extremely thorough, nine-page discussion of Heller, McDonald, Bruen, and Rahimi. This is a perfect capsule summary to teach students about how the doctrine has developed since 2008. But something very significant is missing: Hemani. Indeed, Justice Alito writes that Rahimi was "our most recent Second Amendment." What about Hemani, decided seven days ago? Alito does not cite Hemani at all. But Justice Barrett's concurrence and Justice Jackson's dissent does cite Hemani.
What's even stranger is the sequencing. Justice Alito's opinion should have been released first, as it laid out all of the Second Amendment doctrine, and then Justice Gorsuch's opinion could have come out second, and cited back to Alito. But Hemani came out first.
Something feels off here. Maybe Wolford was supposed to come out first, but the Chief wanted to force out the 9-0 Hemani to send a signal of bipartisanship, so the ordering was flipped? I don't like that theory as there were no other blockbusters last Friday. I don't think the majority opinion flipped in Hemani. The only person who didn't write from that sitting was Justice Thomas, and his view on the Commerce Clause was never going to command a majority.
I can't quite put my finger on it, but something happened with Hemani and Wolford.
Update: Is it possible that Justice Barrett may have lost the majority opinion in Wolford? Justice Alito's majority opinion is 24 pages and avoids any major traps concerning property law. It is neat and clean, and offers a cogent summary of all the case law. Barrett's 14 page concurrence gets into the weeds of scrutiny. Barrett only brings along Thomas and Gorsuch for Part II-B. I can see Roberts thinking this opinion about property law reads like something a law professor would right (it is), and jumping ship to the safe harbor of Alito. Even now, the Barrett concurrence covers much of the same ground as the Alito majority. And she responds often to the Jackson dissent, as a majority opinion would. Barrett did not write an opinion for January when Wolford was argued. There were seven cases that sitting, so Alito may not have had an assignment.
This theory still doesn't explain why Alito didn't acknowledge Hemani. Something is up.
Update #2: Justice Alito's concurrence cites Molly Brady's Stanford Law Review Article as "forthcoming 2026" with a parenthetical of ("last revised Feb. 27, 2026") followed by a permalink, which was created on June 4, 2026 at 8:47 am. The permalink was also made private, which usually happens in the case of a copyright violation.
Alito's other permalinks were created on Monday, May 25, 2026 at 10:18 pm, 10:19 pm, 10:42 pm. Glad to see the Alito clerks are burning the midnight oil.
The reply brief was filed on January 9, and the case was argued on January 20. This citation was clearly created by the Alito chambers at some point after the case was argued. Brady's article was published in April 2026. Barrett's concurrence and Jackson's dissent both cite Brady's article in its final, paginated form. Barrett also includes permalinks, which were created in 2025, likely by the parties.
I don't know what this means, but the timeline suggests Alito's opinion was written earlier, but finalized later.
The post Something Feels Off About Hemani and Wolford (Updated) appeared first on Reason.com.
