TMT construction begins Monday 15 July

[kalakoa]

If you were to poll all Hawaii residents

Poll results would simply be ignored as an inconvenience. Especially given that the poll didn't include the "right" people.

Perhaps we should level the playing field by counting haoles at 3/5 of a vote?

[bystander]

They should just have a special election to settle the matter.

[kalakoa]

just have a special election

Kingdom is already ignoring State Supreme Court, they'll just ignore this too -- unless the popular vote is against TMT, in which case the rule of law is valid.

[kalakoa]

https://www.kitv.com/story/40885420/loca...nstrations

According to Mauna Kea Observatories scheduled projects on the summit are on hold for now. MKO says $4 million worth of vendor and construction contracts were awarded to more than a hundred companies that employ local staff.

Who needs jobs when there's a free campsite with free food and everything.

[ironyak]

@Kaimana - (just keep scrolling rainyjim)
Here's the Senate's roll-call vote on the Newlands Resolution (Jul 6 1898). Note most of the abstentions were from people not present or those who were paired with such as they would be voting opposite. This explains the exact details of the abstained votes and the final tally. Also lots of interesting discussion in the proceeding debate and proposed amendments starting on page 5.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-...1-20-1.pdf (page 24 in the PDF)

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Also agreed that for many involved, the notion of "an illegal" or "no treaty" annexation is central.

If you believe a treaty between the US & the Hawaiian Monarchy would in some way affect the situation we’re in today, look at how the US respected and complied with the hundreds of agreements they signed between native peoples and our government. Very few are considered law today, if anything they’re viewed as quaint historical relics. I doubt a treaty with the Hawaiian Monarchy in the 1800’s would be recognized any differently if one existed.

https://native-land.ca

[ironyak]

@HOTPE - The issue is that the Newlands Resolution that annexed Hawaii was done through a Joint Resolution (House & Senate), and not a treaty (done with just the 2/3rds consent of the Senate, as was the general practice). So the argument was, and is, that it was not constitutional to annex Hawaii (with which the vast majority of the 55th Congress and President McKinley disagreed). The argument doesn't revolve around any of the treaties between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

The argument doesn't revolve around any of the treaties

Yes, I understand. Someone on a previous page had suggested a treaty wasn’t possible, or couldn’t pass the US Congress and a resolution was a weaker substitute. I wanted to point out that even if a treaty had been passed, it probably wouldn’t mean anything today based the the federal government’s pitiful past record.

[ironyak]

Gotcha - yeah, treaties that acquired territory tended to be upheld and enforced while those that limited territorial acquisitions tended to be ignored or overruled. Selectively choosing which laws to follow to benefit your position wasn't invented yesterday (or last month).

[reni]

"it probably wouldn’t mean anything today based the the federal government’s pitiful past record"
------------------------------------------------
Maybe not to the current U.S. gov. or most American citizens ,

But it does HOTPE. It matters to the United Nations and it matters to many ...not just the Hawaiians that have been educated in our Hawaiian Immersion Schools and our very own U. Of H.
Take a look at the professors today, what they teach. It's more than just law.
"Ethics",Righting past wrongs is a big theme in our culture today.
Very much alive on U. S. campuses, including our own.