Hawaiians-Only Election Gets Court Approval

[dakine]

Yesterday the U.S. District Court rejected a lawsuit that argued the Nai Aupuni election violates the U.S. Constitution. You can read all about that here:

http://www.civilbeat.com/2015/10/hawaiia...-approval/

Even though that ruling will most likely be challenged, I believe it is a monumental step. Of course there's the question by many as to whether that path is best. Regardless, I am grateful that saner minds in this instance have prevailed.

Here's a few salient quotes from the article...

“The state has a compelling reason to give dignity to the indigenous people,” he [the judge] said, and could do so by letting Native Hawaiians “decide for themselves whether they want self-governance.”

“The question of sovereignty is not going to go away,” he said.

[Seeb]

The judge didn't at all rule for sovereignty. He said that it wasn't an election it was a " private poll " meaning it has No legal relevance

[Chunkster]

The problem with this "election" is the fact that it specifically excludes Hawaiians who do NOT want some sort of sovereignty. As such, it is fatally skewed from a fairness perspective from the get-go. Also, the fact that it is a private affair is still in dispute because the state used a middleman (OHA, I think) to get the money to the organizers. This will be appealed, and there's a good chance it will be overturned somewhere higher up the judicial food chain. Regardless, whatever entity emerges from the process is also likely to be challenged, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the main element opposing it is one or more disgruntled faction of Hawaiians. The only people likely to profit from this whole process are the lawyers and the insiders at DHHL/OHA who have insured that their nests will be feathered no matter what the outcome.

[kalakoa]

problem with this "election" is the fact that it specifically excludes Hawaiians who do NOT want some sort of sovereignty

Considering the poll has no legal merit and any substantive action will meet with one or more lawsuits, objecting to the "fairness" of this poll is premature.

The only people likely to profit from this whole process are the lawyers

Lawsuits (and high-speed pizza delivery) are the only things the US still does better than other countries.

[PaulW]

There's a few parties in Europe currently pushing for the same thing - votes for natives only. Maybe you could swap notes.

[beepbeep]

Very complicated. I would like to find out more. I sense some unfairness somewhere, but want to know what I am talking about.

Pam in CA

[janet]

Just wondering...

What is the numerical relationship of those who have volunteered to participate in this exercise to those who have opted to stay out of it?

If more Hawaiians decided not to approve this process (by not joining it) than did, is that not the final answer to this "poll" about sovereignty?

[dakine]

Chunkster: The problem with this "election" is the fact that it specifically excludes Hawaiians who do NOT want some sort of sovereignty

How are they excluded? Do you have first hand knowledge to back that statement up or is it just hyperbole? I assume that if one is a Hawaiian and does not believe in any flavor of sovereignty they still have the right to run as a candidate and if they win a seat to be included in the convention process. And, if they present their position and gather enough of a consensus to support it, they will rule the day.

Similarly if you or I have an opposing view to any government process we are free to champion our views and if we gather enough support have them rule the day. And, all those with minority opinions loose. What's the difference? You can even throw in all the shenanigans, look at the way the polls are being skewed to silence Bernie Sanders, but it's a process, it's the American way. To say so and so is being excluded as if that invalidates the process is just naive methinks.

[opihikao]

quote:

---

Originally posted by janet

Just wondering...

What is the numerical relationship of those who have volunteered to participate in this exercise to those who have opted to stay out of it?

If more Hawaiians decided not to approve this process (by not joining it) than did, is that not the final answer to this "poll" about sovereignty?

---

Aloha, janet. As to the question, perhaps, 80% to 20%, the latter being who signed up for Na'i Aupuni. There is not alot of support for this effort, however, it is a good start, given the challenges.

Our ohana (including myself) chose not to participate, as the "details" were somewhat, questionable. However, it is the time for Hawaiian people to stand for "what is right". Given the history, and given what we live with today, it becomes a balancing act. What is "right"??? (Rhetoric, of course).

Wrote alot more, however, due to the "snip and criticize" mode of PW lately, will stand down (refusing to allow disrespect, and worse, responding to it...). This is a very, very, serious time for our people; ALL of us who reside in Hawai'i.

Mahalo (again) dakine, for being steadfast, and mahalo to those who challenge this "train of thought." Our Kupuna were not all of "koko" (blood), yet, served the King, and served the Queen, and maintain our life teachings, which include respect.

(*Disclaimer: Greatgrandfather (Paternal) was English/Irish; Married my Tutu who was pure Hawaiian (100%); On the other side (Maternal), pure Chinese man (Greatgrandfather) married 100% pure Hawaiian (my Kukumahalo, Greatgrandmother).

None of my children meet the criteria of "50%" blood (nor do I), as DHHL warrants, however, we are Hawaiian. So were our forefathers (British, Irish, Chinese, Japanese, etc.), and that is my reason for NOT signing up for Na'i Aupuni, Kana'iolowalu, Kau I'noa, or any entity that "excludes" those who are part of our Hawaiian nation/Kingdom/nation within a nation, etc., just because they do not hold "koko" (bloodline).

I was hoping for a different ruling, given the Rice vs. Cayetano case. As this process will affect us ALL, it is flawed, at best. However, a step forward. We shall see.

Mahalo for all the comments; still reading court documents, and valued opinions, to digest the process.

Mahalo ke Akua, e na Aumakua, e na Kupuna.

Hawai'i Aloha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_17vGYa81s

Have a lovely evening, all.


JMO.

ETA: Chunkster, well stated. Mahalo, again. Aloha ahiahi.

[opihikao]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulW

There's a few parties in Europe currently pushing for the same thing - votes for natives only. Maybe you could swap notes.

---

Paul W., Sir, appreciate your candor, and one liners, Sir. However, we can't compare notes with anyone. It's "apples and oranges".

With due respect. Sir.

JMO.