(c) Copyright 2001 - 2014
Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
All rights reserved
Lawyers have a special interest in Hawaiian sovereignty issues. That's because these issues are very complex, drawing upon both Hawaiian Kingdom law and U.S. law. Historical issues also play an important role in the way laws are interpreted and applied. The following collection of items are listed here because they are of special interest to lawyers. Included are formal, lengthy, heavily-footnoted essays including articles from law journals; legal briefs and court decisions; and some less formal discussions of legal issues. All items included here are used for other topics on this website; but they are also gathered here because they have a legal focus.
Honolulu attorney Patrick W. Hanifin died on June 14, 2003, at age 48. He worked tirelessly on behalf of unity, equality, and aloha for all. This is a compilation of his writings related to Hawaiian sovereignty, and his obituaries. Included are his published scholarly articles on Hawaiian history, the Rice v. Cayetano decision and its progeny cases, and the Akaka bill; legal documents he helped write in the Arakaki I and Arakaki II lawsuits; testimony to the Department of Interior and to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights; testimony to Congress on the Akaka bill; newspaper articles and letters to editor; list of television and radio appearances.
"Hawaiian Apartheid -- Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" (a book by Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. 302 pages. See cover, detailed table of contents, and entire Chapter 1, plus information on how to order the book; at http://tinyurl.com/2a9fqa
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE AKAKA BILL?
Official report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights opposing the Akaka bill, May 5, 2006. Written testimony of four expert panelists includes discussion of important legal decisions on Indian law and ongoing lawsuits against the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Kamehameha Schools.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights letter to Congressional leaders August 28, 2009 once again blasting the Akaka bill: calling it unconstitutional, racially divisive, setting a bad precedent, and contrary to the multiracial polity of the Hawaiian Kingdom. On official stationery signed by Commissioners.
Akaka bill passed both its committees in mid-December 2009, by means of stealth maneuvers. The Senate committee passed a radical and dangerous new version which is opposed by Hawaii's Governor and Attorney General. Links are provided to the text of House and Senate versions, important letters from Governor Lingle and two Hawaii race-based institutions, and news reports.
Zogby poll of Hawaii citizens released December 15, 2009 shows majority oppose Akaka bill and want a referendum on the general election ballot before Congress considers it.
Akaka Bill Hearing: Video of entire hearing and Written Testimony by Invited Witnesses in the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources on June 11, 2009
Let's use the fiscal crisis to eliminate federal and state racial entitlement programs. Funding for shovel-ready jobs can come from scalpel-ready cuts.
Hawaii begins to create a state-recognized tribe. SB1520 passed the legislature on May 3, 2011. After the Governor signed it into law, it is now known as Act 195 (Hawaii Regular Session 2011). Why did they do it? What happens now?
The trouble with the Kana'iolowalu racial registry
Building a Hawaiian tribe through actions of the state legislature: May 2014 progress report (Roll Commission failure to follow the requirements of enabling legislation Act 195; identity theft of 87,000 names from earlier racial registries; enrollment of minor children; legislative hearing as cheerleader rather than oversight enforcer; and more issues)
Why the new Akaka bill (September 13, 2012) is the worst one yet: bad for the people of Hawaii, bad for the genuine Indian tribes, bad for the entire U.S. It authorizes casinos in Hawaii and on the mainland; worsens racial balkanization in America by redefining "tribe" in the Constitution to mean "indigenous"; abandons protections for Hawaii's people that were in previous versions; grants federal recognition to a tribe not yet created. The Indian non-intercourse act would no longer be prohibited to the Akaka tribe, thus allowing the tribe to reopen claims against the state and federal governments for all the ceded lands. The new bill has no statute of limitation or time limit on land claims.
Can Akaka tribe be recognized by bureaucratic fiat? Due process issues raised in report by the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Interior regarding arbitrary and capricious granting of recognition to the "Tejon Indian Tribe" in 2011 by Larry Echo Hawk, who was then Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.
The most effective way to get a gambling casino in Hawaii is to create a Hawaiian tribe and get it federally recognized by the Obama administration. But the genuine tribes on the mainland might help us stop that. Includes a discussion of 25 CFR 83.7 criteria for tribal recognition, Indian Reorganization Act, Carcieri v. Salazar, Indian Non-Intercourse Act(s), Hawaii Coalition Against Legalized Gambling
On January 10, 2014 a letter was sent to more than 150 leaders of Indian tribes on the U.S. mainland. The letter describes how federal recognition of a phony "Native Hawaiian" tribe would have bad consequences for the genuine tribes, and asks them to express opposition to executive action when speaking to officials in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of Interior, and White House.
Department of Interior attempt to create a Hawaiian tribe and give it federal recognition through administrative rule-making -- full text of U.S. Department of Interior Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, June 20, 2014; and how to find all written testimony submitted by the deadline of August 19.
Testimony of Kenneth Conklin to Department of Interior opposing attempt to create Hawaiian tribe and give it federal recognition through administrative rule-making -- 14 sections totaling 100 pages, in pdf format, submitted August 15, 2014
The 7 best testimonies against the Department of Interior proposal to create a Hawaiian tribe and give it federal recognition (the 60-day comment period ended August 19, 2014). The DOI proposal is at
At least 2069 written comments were submitted. A large majority were opposed to the Department of Interior proposal. The following seven testimonies are especially valuable in opposition because they explicitly rely upon the fundamental principles of racial equality and the unity of all Hawaii's people under the undivided sovereignty of the State of Hawaii. Items (1), (3), (4), and (5) contain significant legal arguments with extensive documentation.
(1) Kenneth R. Conklin of the Center for Hawaiian Sovereignty Studies
(2) Keli'i Akina, President, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii
(3) Hans A. von Spakovsky of The Heritage Foundation
(4) Paul M. Sullivan
(5) H.W. Burgess
(6) Sandra Puanani Burgess
(7) Jack Miller
Why businesses, labor unions, and community groups in Hawaii should oppose state and/or federal recognition of a phony "Native Hawaiian" tribe -- letter to Hawaii Coalition Against Legalized Gambling, and commentary in Honolulu Star-Advertiser, as examples
U.S. apology resolution 20th anniversary -- A resolution was introduced in the Hawaii legislature to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the U.S. apology resolution; and testimony was offered to the Hawaii legislature in the form of a substitute resolution explaining that the apology resolution is filled with falsehoods, has produced bad consequences, and should be repealed. Detailed footnotes provide extensive documentation proving that statements about history in the apology resolution are false, and proving that bad consequences predicted by opponents of the resolution have actually happened.
Racial entitlement bills in the 2013 Hawaii legislature (and how all the Republicans except Senator Slom and Representative McDermott are voting in lockstep with the Democrats)
Gearing up for the divorce -- Klub Kanaka greedily looks ahead to property division and alimony from the State of Hawaii (Hawaii House Committee on Hawaiian Affairs holds informational briefing on July 13, 2011 for government departments to tell how they can help implement Act 195 creating a state-recognized tribe)
OHA is a state government agency despite its assertions to the contrary. It must disclose its income, budget, and expenditures. OHA, the new Act 195 state recognized tribe, and any future federally recognized Akaka tribe are government-created agencies and therefore must all comply with the 15th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Professor William B. Allen, former Chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, explains how Federal Indian Law violates the civil rights of tribal members
Ethnic Hawaiian government officials have a severe conflict of interest regarding the Akaka bill. If the Akaka bill passes then no ethnic Hawaiian should represent the state or counties in deciding how to divide land and jurisdiction between the state and the tribe. Therefore no ethnic Hawaiian should be elected or appointed to high office this year or in any future year until the bill is abandoned, for fear the bill will pass.
Akaka bill deja vu (Groundhog Day). The new Akaka bill introduced February 4, 2009 is identical to the one from 2000-2001. It strips away all protections inserted in multiple amendments since then. This webpage describes what many of those protections were and why they are important.
Akaka bill -- Testimony of Ken Conklin submitted August 17, 2007 for a hearing by the Hawaii Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Honolulu City Council resolution proposed in April 2010 to support the Akaka bill, and detailed testimony against it, and a proposed substitute resolution opposing the Akaka bill
Open letter to President Obama regarding the Akaka bill (Hawaiian Government Reorganization bill)
Feds to Hawaii: We did the crime, now you do the time. Two unfunded federal mandates single out Hawaii: Micronesian healthcare and Akaka bill.
Tenth anniversary of U.S. Supreme Court decision in Rice v. Cayetano. The February 23, 2000 decision in Hawaii's most important civil rights lawsuit spurred a decade of additional civil rights lawsuits against government and private race-based programs, and prompted racial separatists to seek protection for those programs through the Hawaiian Government Reorganization bill (Akaka bill) now pending in Congress. Webpage includes detailed review of and links to political and legal events before and after the Rice decision, including the lawsuits Arakaki#1, Barrett, Carroll, Arakaki#2, Kuroiwa, property taxes on Hawaiian Homelands, Kamehameha admissions policy; and 10 year history of the Akaka bill.
Corboy: Hawaii lawsuit against racial discrimination in property tax rates. [This lawsuit cites language in the Rice v. Cayetano decision which ruled that "native Hawaiian" is a racial category; and therefore Corboy argues it is contrary to the 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause for Hawaii counties to give property tax exemptions or huge reductions to all leaseholders on the lands of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1921, where federal and state law requires all those leaseholders to have a minimum Hawaiian native blood quantum.]
State of Hawaii enacts legislation in 2012 to transfer to OHA land in Kakaako valued at $200 Million. But is this land transfer legally permissible and morally righteous? Text of legislation and all testimony and committee reports; links to a demand letter from attorney H. William Burgess portending possible lawsuit to block the transfer; history of the ceded lands and how OHA acquired the "right" to 20% of ceded land revenues.
Bringing Mainland Tribal Troubles to Hawaii: 13 news reports from mainland USA from October through December 2011 illustrating some of the troubles that will come to Hawaii if the Akaka bill passes or if a state-recognized tribe is established.
Some jurisdictional conflicts if a Native Hawaiian tribe gets federal recognition, as shown by actual mainland examples from the last week of July 2013
A Brief History of Citizenship and Voting Rights in Hawai'i (Kingdom, Republic, Territory, and State) by attorney Patrick W. Hanifin.
Note: This important essay shows that all persons born in the Kingdom of Hawai'i were subjects of the Kingdom. Thus, many thousands of people of Asian and Euro-American ancestry were fully equal with Native Hawaiians in the Kingdom (including voting rights for adult males), just as their descendants are equal in Hawai'i today. The Akaka bill is racist when it asks Congress to give political recognition only to Native Hawaiians, using the 1893 date of the overthrow, ignoring the fully equal non-natives in the Kingdom.
How Hawaiian racial entitlements take away rights from private and government landowners in ways unique among the 50 states. Includes some discussion of the public trust doctrine for water, appurtenant water rights for taro, the PASH decision as a license for ethnic Hawaiians to trespass, NAGPRA and local law regarding ancient burials, regulatory takings and inverse condemnation, collective racial ownership of Kaho'olawe and several valleys, failed legislation on bioprospecting that would have established ethnic Hawaiian collective right to regulate research on biota and to extract racial royalties on any discoveries in the name of indigenous intellectual property rights.
S.66, the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement bill in the 112th Congress -- Reauthorizing an ineffective but socially dangerous pork-barrel waste of taxpayer dollars
HCR107 in the Hawaii legislature of 2011 -- A resolution establishing a joint legislative investigating committee to investigate the status of two executive agreements entered into in 1893 between United States President Grover Cleveland and Queen Liliuokalani of the Hawaiian Kingdom, called the Liliuokalani assignment and the agreement of restoration.
So-called executive agreements between Hawaii Queen Liliuokalani and U.S. President Grover Cleveland -- explaining and debunking the new Hawaiian history scam by Keanu Sai
Ken Conklin Ph.D. vs. Keanu Sai Ph.D. -- Dialog regarding a theory that Hawaii Queen Liliuokalani and U.S. President Grover Cleveland had executive agreements, still binding today, which would require the U.S. to disgorge Hawaii and recognize its continuing sovereign independence
Keanu Sai's Hawaiian history fantasies underlying his adventures with the International Criminal Court, the community of diplomats, and the Hawaii mortgage market. The alleged Liliuokalani Assignment, and the alleged Executive Agreement of Restoration. Letter to Swiss diplomats asking them to cross-examine Keanu Sai during his presentation to them on November 11, 2013
HR258 and HCR293 in the Hawaii legislature of 2011 -- A resolution to rip the Treaty of Annexation out of the hand of President McKinley in his statue in front of McKinley High School
Book Review of William M. Morgan Ph.D., PACIFIC GIBRALTAR: U.S. - JAPANESE RIVALRY OVER THE ANNEXATION OF HAWAII, 1885-1898 (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2011). Historian analyzes the Hawaiian revolution and annexation, and Grover Cleveland's attempt to overthrow President Dole and restore the Hawaiian monarchy. Special attention to Japanese immigration, Japanese diplomatic and military involvement in opposing annexation, and the normalcy of using joint resolution as the method of annexation.
The Republic of Hawaii was created on July 4, 1894, with the publication of its Constitution. At least five native Hawaiians were delegates to the Constitutional Convention; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Republic was native Hawaiian John Kaulukou. The full text of the Constitution, and information about the Constitutional Convention that produced it, are available at:
Dialog -- Ian Lind vs. Mark Umi Perkins regarding whether it is proper to poke fun at pretenders to the non-existent Hawaiian throne, whether Hawaii remains an independent nation, and other arcane topics including whether Keanu Sai's Hague arbitration actually confirmed the continuing existence of the independent nation of Hawaii, and whether joint resolution is allowable as the method for the U.S. to ratify a treaty of annexation. In discussing annexation, a commenter provided summaries and links to two Supreme Court decisions: Jones v. United States (1890) and DeLima v. Bidwell (1901).
INTERNATIONAL RECOGNITION OF THE REPUBLIC OF HAWAII -- Emperors, Kings, Queens, Princes, and Presidents of at least 19 foreign nations personally signed formal letters of diplomatic recognition de jure, received by the Republic of Hawaii between July 1894 and January 1895. Those letters are available in the state Archives. Photographs of them have been placed on a webpage at
Historical significance and implications for statehood, Akaka bill, and ceded lands; are explained at
along with a detailed example of the Hawaiian sovereignty lie that such letters do not exist.
Treaty of Annexation between the Republic of Hawaii and the United States of America (1898). Full text of the treaty, and of the resolutions whereby the Republic of Hawaii legislature and the U.S. Congress ratified it. The politics surrounding the treaty, then and now.
Helping foreign diplomats understand the history of U.S. sovereignty in Hawaii and the legitimacy of the relationship between their nations and Hawaii. [Lawsuit against U.S. by a Hawaiian independence activist seeks to add foreign nations as defendants]
Attorney Paul M. Sullivan's most recent analysis of the Akaka bill was done in August 2009 for the version S.1011 and H.R.2314 in the 111th Congress. His monograph, in pdf format, includes cartoons by Darryl Cagle. "Killing Aloha" -- The 'Akaka Bill' is wrong for Native Hawaiians, wrong for the State of Hawai'i and wrong for the United States. Here's why."
Mr. Sullivan's first analysis of the Akaka bill was written in 2001 for S.81, which had identical content to the bills H.R.404 which passed the House in 2000 and S.2899 which nearly passed the Senate just before Christmas 2000. See
Are Kanaka Maoli (Native Hawaiians) an Indian Tribe? Federal Criteria for Recognition of Tribal Status.
The Rice v. Cayetano Decision: Supreme Court Prohibits Racially Segregated Voting in OHA Elections
The Progeny of Rice v. Cayetano: A Panel Discussion at University of Hawai'i Law School, And The Journal Articles It Spawned (Discussing The Lawsuits Following After and Based Upon Rice v. Cayetano). Two of the articles, by attorneys Patrick W. Hanifin and Paul M. Sullivan, are especially important.
Arakaki vs. State of Hawai'i -- The Right to Run for Statewide Public Office Without Racial Restriction, Including the Right of Voters to Have a Full Range of Candidates Unrestricted by Race
ARAKAKI V. LINGLE (formerly Arakaki v. Cayetano) -- also known informally as ARAKAKI #2 -- A multiethnic group of 16 Hawai'i citizens filed suit March 4, 2002 challenging the Constitutionality of both the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. This large webpage includes a press release, timeline of the ceded lands dispute, and major legal documents filed in the Arakaki #2 lawsuit.
Day v. Apoliona: Lawsuit against OHA by native Hawaiians with high blood quantum gets resurrected by U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in August 2007. A motion to intervene was filed in November 2007 by a group of 6 plaintiffs with no Hawaiian native blood seeking to protect the rights of a million Hawaii citizens to share in the ceded lands trust.
KUROIWA V. LINGLE -- Lawsuit filed April 3, 2008 seeking to dismantle the Office of Hawaiian Affairs of the State of Hawaii. Legal documents, news reports, and commentaries.
Race on birth certificates in Hawaii in 2009! The State of Hawaii requires birth certificates to list the races of the mother and father (if he is known). The state government backed down, at least a little bit, only after a federal civil rights lawsuit was filed by parents demanding issuance of a race-free certificate. Webpage explains that the State wants to list race on birth certificates to enable ethnic Hawaiians to prove eligibility for racial entitlements. Text of the legal complaint is included, along with a news release.
"NATIVE HAWAIIAN" VICTIMHOOD CLAIMS -- what are they, why are they being asserted, and how can the bad statistics be explained? Advocates for race-based programs frequently justify them by asserting claims that "Native Hawaiians" have the worst statistics among all Hawai'i ethnic groups for education, income, unemployment, drug abuse, incarceration, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, etc. Lists of claims like these have been included in legal briefs to defend Kamehameha Schools' racially exclusionary policy as a form of affirmative action; and have been included in the Akaka bill (both the "findings" preamble of the bill itself and, more extensively, in the committee report accompanying the bill). But such claims are rarely accompanied by the documentation that would allow researchers to verify them independently. Most economic and social "victimhood" statistics are probably due to the fact that "Native Hawaiians" on average are only 25 years of age -- 13 years younger than the average of other ethnic groups. Most health statistics are probably explained by the strange counting method which allocates full tally marks to "Native Hawaiian" victimhood for victims whose native blood quantum is very low -- about 3/4 of all "Native Hawaiians" each have more than 3/4 of their ancestry from Asia, Europe, or America; thus, most of their victimhood tally marks should be awarded to races other than "Native Hawaiian." See:
Abusive disparate treatment of ethnic Hawaiians by the judiciary and the criminal justice system? Rebuttal to a report by the Hawaiian grievance industry released September 28, 2010. Detailed analysis of scientific and political issues raised by the report. Some of the issues analyzed are: Inappropriateness of awarding a full tally mark to "Native Hawaiians" when someone has only a small fraction of native blood; Failure to adequately account for the age discrepancy (median age for ethnic Hawaiians = 25, median age for everyone else = 39); False and chronologically chaotic claims about history; Unsubstantiated claim that ethnic Hawaiians suffer more than other people born and raised in Hawaii when sent away from Hawaii to mainland prisons.
Akaka Bill Controversy Draws Congressional Attention to Illegal "Native Hawaiian" Entitlements -- House Republican Study Committee, September 21 2005, Proposes Killing $40 Million Per Year
"Hawaiian Reparations: Nothing Lost, Nothing Owed." Are kanaka maoli entitled to reparations for the overthrow of the monarchy and loss of "their" land and "their" political power? A heavily footnoted article by Honolulu attorney Patrick W. Hanifin, published in the Hawai'i Bar Journal in 1982 and republished here with author's permission.
Anti-Caucasian Racial Hate Crimes in Hawaii -- Southern Poverty Law Center brings the issue to national awareness in a flawed but valuable Intelligence Report article.
January 2011 new law in Arizona prohibits using public school ethnic studies courses to incite racial hatred and anti-Americanism. How a weekly Hawaiian-language newspaper column illustrates the need to bring this law to Hawaii.
Was Hawaiian language ever illegal in Hawai'i? Was Hawaiian language illegal in the schools? The truth about this malicious claim.
On January 24, 2011, Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie gave his first "State of the State" speech. In the written press release of his speech, his falsehood was "In 1896 it was made illegal to teach in the Hawaiian language." The sentence he actually spoke was even worse: "In 1896 it was made illegal to teach the Hawaiian language." These are variations of a commonly told lie, which says that In 1896 Hawaiian language was made illegal. A webpage provides full text of Abercrombie's written speech, an audio podcast and a video of the speech (with timeline and closed captioning), and further analysis explaining why Abercrombie's lie is scurrilous. See
Hawaiian Language as a Political Weapon
An important subpage of the one above is:
A law in the County of Honolulu requires every new street name to be Hawaiian. The law is cited and quoted. This illustrates how Hawaiian language is used as a political weapon by demanding that the names of places and streets must be Hawaiian -- historical background and 4 case studies of how sovereignty activists went to the County Council and state legislature to demand name changes even for already-existing streets and places: Thurston Ave.(Kamakaeha), Barbers Point (Kalaeloa), Dillingham Military Reservation (Kawaihapai), Fort Barrette Road (Kualakai).
The student body at the University of Hawai'i has a significantly higher percentage of ethnic Hawaiians than would be expected by their proportion of the state's population, while Caucasians and ethnic Chinese are significantly under-represented minorities. Therefore, race-based tuition-waivers and affirmative action recruitment to promote diversity at UH would be far more appropriate for Caucasians and ethnic Chinese than for ethnic Hawaiians.
Voting Rights, Property Rights, and Hawaiian Sovereignty: The Outrageously Racist Demands of the Hawaiian Supremacists
Should race or religion be used as a basis for granting, prohibiting, or otherwise restricting access to certain public lands of the state of Hawaii? Testimony of Ken Conklin for the Halawa-Luluku Interpretive Development Project, January 22, 2008.
The Claim of Ethnic Superiority in Comprehension and Reasoning -- Supreme Court nominee Sotomayor's assertion (Latina women make better decisions than white men) was mild compared with what passes for normal in Hawaii
Keanu Sai got started in the Hawaiian sovereignty scam biz by proclaiming himself Regent pro-tem of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. He claimed land titles in Hawai'i are junk because the overthrow, annexation, and statehood were all illegal. He collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from hundreds of clients for bogus title searches and warranty deeds. He caused grief to property owners, messing up the real estate industry and mortgage banking for more than a year by filing bogus land title warranty deeds at the Bureau of Conveyances. On this page are a description of the process Mr. Sai followed to get himself established as Regent pro-tem, and a lengthy series of newspaper articles reporting the rise and fall of his "Perfect Title" company.
Hawaiian Kingdom land scams make a big return in 2008 [FBI investigating mortgage scam involving issuance of Hawaiian Kingdom bonds.
"Kahana: How the Land Was Lost" by Robert H. Stauffer. Essay length book review. Stauffer says the usual myths are not true that haoles stole Hawaiian lands immediately after the Mahele (1848) through Hawaiian ignorance. However, he develops a new conspiracy theory to explain how Hawaiians lost their land to haoles through a nonjudicial foreclosure law passed by stealth in the (allegedly) haole-dominated Kingdom legislature of 1874. Stauffer also pushes the profound idea (true by definition) that if there were a law making native land unalienable then Hawaiians would not have lost their land. Well, duh!
Ceded lands issues in the Hawaii Legislature, 2009
Legislation in Hawaii in 2009 to declare ethnic Hawaiians as an indigenous people
Who Owns The Crown Lands of Hawaii? -- Book by Professor Jon Van Dyke, book review by attorney Paul M. Sullivan, and links to some related materials available on the internet.
Hawaiian Bones -- Rites For the Dead vs. Rights Of the Living (A philosophical inquiry into the conflict between respecting ancient burials vs. respecting the needs of living people for construction projects, and suggestions for how such conflicts should be resolved)
Hawaii Bioprospecting -- Hearings by the Temporary Advisory Committee on Bioprospecting (late 2007), and testimony by Ken Conklin. Legal issues concern whether to pass laws regulating bioprospecting and distribution of royalties; whether such laws would conflict with the PASH decision; and whether such laws would constitute a partial eminent domain "taking" of property requiring compensation to landowners.
Hawaii State Senate Education Committee informational briefing on charter schools, November 29, 2007, including testimony by Ken Conklin. Legal issue concerning appropriateness of Hawaiian culture focused government charter schools using religious ceremony and prayer during the school day; and using these schools to indoctrinate children with a religious and political viewpoint.
S1929 FEDERAL LEGISLATION (in the previous 106th Congress) TO PROVIDE RACIAL ENTITLEMENT FOR HEALTHCARE: POINT-BY-POINT REBUTTAL OF FALSE AND TWISTED HISTORICAL AND LEGAL CLAIMS BURIED IN THE FINE PRINT BY SOVEREIGNTY ACTIVISTS
Lili'uokalani Loses a Big One (The Crown Lands) Lili'uokalani v. United States, 45 Ct Cl. 418, 1910. In this lawsuit decided in the year 1910, ex-queen Lili'uokalani sued the United States for monetary compensation for the "taking" of "her" crown lands when those lands were ceded to the United States in the Annexation of 1898 and the Organic Act of 1900. The complete decision by the Court of Claims is carefully transcribed here, together with analysis of its significance for today's Hawaiian sovereignty movement.
Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanianaole -- Just how princely was he? (Kuhio was absent from his nation for many years on an adventure trip during the crucial period in the late 1890s leading to annexation; and he filed a lawsuit in 1915 to have Liliuokalani declared mentally incompetent so he could steal her Waikiki lands she had set aside for her Childrens Trust)
JONAH KUHIO KALANIANAOLE v. LILIUOKALANI, Supreme Court of Hawaii, 23 Haw. 457; 1916. (Court-approved syllabus and complete text of ruling)
Mauna Ala (Royal Mausoleum) -- History, Mystery, Ghost Stories, and A Claim of Continuing Hawaiian Sovereign Territory
John Philip "Pilipo" Souza -- state income tax evasion by a man with no Hawaiian native ancestry claiming to be a native-born subject of the still-living Kingdom of Hawai'i
Ceded Lands Belong to All the People of Hawai'i; There Should Be No Racial Allocation of Ceded Lands or Their Revenues. Extensive analysis of the origins of the ceded lands in the government and crown lands of the Mahele (1848), Annexation (1898), and Statehood Act (1959). Detailed explanation why there is no historical, legal, or moral basis for racial claims to ceded lands or their revenues. A shorter, simplified version is provided in an open letter to the Legislature.
Selling the Ceded Lands -- The Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the State cannot sell ceded lands without permission from ethnic Hawaiians; but the State appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which agreed to decide the case. Decions by lower courts are provided, along with legal briefs by the State of Hawaii and by seven amicus groups supporting the State of Hawaii; plus news reports and commentaries.
The Hawaii Annexation Resolution (1898) and the Hawaii Apology Resolution (1993) -- Do they have the force of law?
Thurston Twigg-Smith, "Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the Facts Matter?" (Honolulu, HI: Goodale Publishing, 1998). Mr. Twigg-Smith graciously allowed his entire book to be reproduced on the internet, because it is helpful to an understanding of the ceded lands issue. For land issues, see especially Chapter 9 "Land is Key", but the whole book makes Interesting reading for historians and the general public.
The entire book can be downloaded for free, at
Bellows Air Force Station -- 1995 Environmental Impact Statement considers and rejects typical sovereignty activists' claims that ethnic Hawaiians have a racial right to own the ceded lands or to determine public policy for the use of ceded lands.
Native(?) Hawaiian Gathering Rights(?) Attorney Paul M. Sullivan's extensive legal analysis of the underlying issues in the PASH case, with 371 hot-linked footnotes.
Neighbors Living Under Different Laws -- Example of State Sex Offender Registry (A court ruling in Minnesota shows that if the Akaka bill passes, then any ethnic Hawaiian who is a sex offender can avoid placing his name on the sex offender registry merely by moving to an address on any Hawaiian homeland, even if he later moves out of the homeland. Example: 7 out of 11 registered sex offenders in Waimanalo live on the Waimanalo Hawaiian Homeland, within easy walking distance of an elementary school and of non-native neighbors; and pay zero property tax).
In 1990 a federal law was passed called NAGPRA -- the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. It requires museums that have preserved and protected ancient bones and cultural artifacts to "return" them to individual living descendants or to "tribal" groups. But the implementation of that law in Hawai'i has been very poorly managed; and there are serious problems with the law nationwide. Bishop Museum has allowed extremely valuable artifacts to be taken by one favored, radical group without respectibg the rights of competing claimants. Future generations will be deprived of the right to study and be inspired by those artifacts. See details about the NAGPRA law, Kennewick Man, and Hawai'i controversies about Mokapu, Honokahua, the ka'ai (sennit caskets) containing 500-year-old bones of Liloa and Lonoikamakahiki, the Providence Museum spear rest, the Forbes Cave artifacts, and the activities of the group called Hui Malama, plus a federal investigation of the Forbes Cave artifacts controversy at a meeting of the NAGPRA Review Committee in St. Paul, Minnesota May 9-11, 2003.
Iolani Palace Rockpile -- Religious Shrine Or Political Symbol? (Vandalism raises questions)
Proposed new rules for Iolani Palace and grounds -- testimony to DLNR offered by Ken Conklin in honor of Statehood Day, August 15, 2008
The following webpage indirectly raises the Constitutional issue of "establishment of religion" because the ancient Hawaiian religion is the fundamental ethnic Hawaiian intellectual justification for claiming a right to race-based political sovereignty.
The role of religion in Hawaiian history and sovereignty. How the ancient native Hawaiian religion is being revived to serve the political goal of establishing race-based sovereignty. How the native religion and Christian religion shaped culture and politics in the Kingdom of Hawaii. Compilation of selected webpages and books.
Amicus Brief written by Honolulu attorney H. William Burgess, filed May 27, 1999 in Hawaii Supreme Court in OHA vs. State (OHA lawsuit seeking 20% of revenues from Hilo Hospital, Waikiki Duty Free Shoppers, public housing and other revenues). Amicus brief points out that OHA laws violate the Constitution of United States.
On March 28, 2000 a multi-racial group of 23 citizens of Hawaii
MOVED TO INTERVENE
in OHA v. State in the Hawaii Supreme Court. Their
MEMO IN SUPPORT
charges the State Attorney General has a conflict of interest because he represents the interests of OHA in the Rice case. Their
challenges the validity of OHA itself based on the
"The Ceded Lands Case -- Money Intended For Education Goes to OHA." Article by H. William Burgess and Sandra Puanani Burgess, HAWAII BAR JOURNAL (July, 2001), pp. 9-15
Kamehameha School Racially Exclusionary Admissions Policy, and Tax-Exempt Status, in View of Rice v. Cayetano
From December 17, 2004 through January 19, 2005 a series of four articles were published in Hawaii Reporter on-line newspaper. This series is notable because the second article was by the Attorney General of the State of Hawai'i, Mark J. Bennett, claiming that the Akaka bill would be constitutional and would be a good thing to do. The third and fourth articles were direct replies to his claims. Three of the four articles were written by attorneys. All four articles are gathered together at:
PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR ETHNIC NATION-BUILDING IN HAWAI'I: Hawaiian language immersion schools; Hawaiian culture charter schools; a proposed law to create a separate public school system explicitly controlled by racially-defined Native Hawaiians; all these things placed in context of the purpose of education, public schools vs. private schools, voucher systems, the charter school movement, and the history of education in Hawai'i.
Governor Linda Lingle was very happy to announce on April 2, 2004 that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is supporting her struggle to break up the Department of Education into locally elected school boards. But OHA has an evil agenda hidden beneath the surface of its support for Lingle's proposal. OHA supports the creation of an apartheid school system that would include a separate noncontiguous district for all the "host culture" charter schools.
RELIGION AND ZEALOTRY IN THE HAWAIIAN SOVEREIGNTY MOVEMENT -- HOW RELIGIOUS MYTHS ARE USED TO SUPPORT POLITICAL CLAIMS FOR RACIAL SUPREMACY IN HAWAI'I. See especially the subpage entitled: POLITICAL CLAIMS TO COLLECTIVE CULTURAL "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" RIGHTS (ESPECIALLY REGARDING SPIRITUAL SYMBOLS, WAYS OF KNOWING, AND THE SPIRITUAL/CULTURAL INTERPRETATION OF POLITICAL LEADERSHIP)
SOVEREIGNTY FRAUD -- "Legal" Proceedings and "Community Service" Projects that Have the Appearance of Legitimacy but are Merely Propaganda Ploys or Sovereignty-Front Organizations: (1) The Perfect Title Company land title scam; (2) The Hague Arbitration; (3) The Ahupua'a Restoration Council of He'eia (including analysis of racial restrictions on serving as Director, and gag rule, in the by-laws); (4) New Issue of Hawaiian Kingdom Bonds (110 years too late!); (5) U.S. income tax fraud based on claims that Hawai'i is a foreign nation; (6) How Bumpy Kanahele and Activists Seeking Reparations for Slavery are Blackmailing Bank of America as it Seeks to Merge With FleetBoston. The concept of a bank chartered under federal regulations, with FDIC insurance, with racial restrictions on bank stock ownership and bank management, and focusing on ethnic Hawaiian home mortgages and business loans; (7) Other sovereignty frauds related to Makua Valley military training, use of Mauna Kea for astronomical telescopes, use of public charter schools and language-immersion schools for ethnic nation-building.
April 15 Is Income Tax Day -- But Not For Everyone
John Philip "Pilipo" Souza -- state income tax evasion by a man with no Hawaiian native ancestry claiming to be a native-born subject of the still-living Kingdom of Hawai'i
The role of Alaska Native Corporations in pushing the Akaka bill -- Ken Conklin's short review of this topic as a followup to investigative reporter Jim Dooley's lengthy and detailed analysis of the recent history of federal contractor preferences for ethnic Hawaiian companies and the role of Alaska Native Corporations in Hawaii's economy. Webpage includes both Dooley's entire report and Conklin's extension of it.
Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights -- The General Theory, and Why It Does Not Apply in Hawai'i
"Polynesian" Voyaging -- Political Agenda, Ethnic Dominance, Cultural Authenticity, and Blood Nationalism. An extended book review of Ben Finney, "Sailing in the Wake of the Ancestors: Reviving Polynesian Voyaging." Is "Polynesian" voyaging really Polynesian? How does ancestral knowledge get transmitted to today's Hawaiians after centuries of being forgotten? Theories of racial memory, or deep culture. The importance of having ethnic Hawaiians as leaders and as a majority of crew members for perceptions of cultural authenticity. The role of Hokule'a as a logo or icon for an ethnic Hawaiian tribe or nation.
Hawaiian Epistemology and Education -- A claim that anyone with a drop of Hawaiian native blood has genetically and culturally encoded unique ways of knowing and learning; and therefore ethnic Hawaiian children (and other ethnic minorities to a lesser degree) have special needs for uniquely tailored curriculum and instructional methods. This claim will be used to demand that "Native Hawaiians" as a group should be classified as special needs students and receive extra funding under a weighted student formula; and this claim will also be used to justify a demand for a non-contiguous separate public school system for "Native Hawaiians."
Analysis of the terms "culture", "Native Hawaiian" and "oral history" -- Comments on NASA's Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Outrigger Telescopes Project by Honolulu attorney Paul M. Sullivan. Mr. Sullivan calls into question the use of such vague terms to assert that "Native Hawaiians" have special "cultural" rights over Mauna Kea based on "oral history" developed through interviews by a "cultural expert" who has a conflict of interest when serving as both an interpreter and information gatherer for NASA and also as an advocate for a local group opposing the NASA project.
Hawaii Advisory Committee to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights -- New members appointed July 13, 2007; Its history of supporting racial supremacy 1996-2006
Hawai'i Bioprospecting Bill -- The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (a bill to regulate biological research on public lands is a trojan horse for Hawaiian racial supremacy in land use policy)
Testimony submitted to the Judicial Selection Committee on January 7, 2004 regarding a petition for retention in judicial office: Should Judge Sandra Simms Be Retained in Office for Another 10 Years?
Aloha For All -- Political Activity in the Legislature and in State Regulatory Agencies, Year 2002. A resolution introduced, testimony opposing 3 OHA bills and 1 education bill, DLNR testimony regarding a NASA telescope project on Mauna Kea.
Aloha For All -- Political activity in the State of Hawai'i Legislature, Regular Session of 2003, including testimony on numerous bills and resolutions.
Hawaii Legislature Informational Briefing Regarding the Akaka Bill by U.S. Senators Inouye and Akaka, and U.S. Representatives Abercrombie and Case, on March 31, 2005 (Hawaiian language, Christian prayer, Legislature's failure to perform due dilligence)
Hawaii State Legislature Hearings on How to Circumvent Court Decisions Unfavorable to OHA and Kamehameha Schools, October 2005
Racial Supremacy Government Policies Worldwide, Compared To Hawaiian Sovereignty Proposals
Fiji and Hawai'i Compared -- Racial Supremacy By Law in Fiji Resembles What Hawaiian Sovereignty Activists Are Seeking (both Akaka bill and independence proposals)
Analogy of the Stolen House and its mutation, Analogy of the Stolen Car. Around the turn of the century (2000, not 1900!) an analogy became popular among some Hawaiian sovereignty activists. They said Hawaiian history was like the history of a house that got overwhelmed by guests. A few guests were welcomed but then moved in permanently. The guests then invited more guests of their own. All the guests then began making new house rules. Soon the original (and still rightful) homeowners were forced to live in a small rear bedroom, and perhaps even forced to live in a tent in the backyard. The original homeowners finally got angry and are trying to reassert their rights. They might even call the cops to help them take back what is rightfully theirs.
Send comments or questions to:
You may now
GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE
(c) Copyright 2001 - 2014 Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D. All rights reserved