Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Judge takes
no further action
on Rice
He urges Hawaii to
By Pat Omandam
'take a deep breath' before
pursuing who can now be
an OHA trustee
Star-BulletinSaying there is "no further business before this court," U.S. District Chief Judge David A. Ezra today dismissed the Rice vs. Cayetano case, ending a 3-1/2-year lawsuit that eventually opened the Office of Hawaiian Affairs elections to all voters, and not just to those of Hawaiian ancestry.
"My clear reading of this majority opinion (of the U.S. Supreme Court) is that it does not justify any further action by this court," Ezra said at a hearing today.
Ezra this morning agreed with a stipulation filed by both parties this week that there was nothing left for the federal court to decide.
As a result, the issue now moves to the Hawaii Supreme Court, where the state and OHA await a decision on whether it will discuss their motion to clarify whether there are any vacancies on the board as a result of the Rice decision and who can fill them.
At today's 25-minute hearing, Ezra discussed two things: the Feb. 28 motion filed by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to intervene in the case, and this week's filing by plaintiff Harold "Freddy" Rice and defendant Gov. Ben Cayetano in which they stipulate there is no further business before the federal court other than to enter a judgment and set court costs.
Ezra said the U.S. Supreme Court's Feb. 23 ruling was by no means "an unanimous act," citing that only five justices agreed to the majority opinion. Nevertheless, the majority ruling was narrowly defined, and Ezra said he wasn't about to expand it to other issues, such as whether anyone can now become a candidate for OHA.
He said any permanent solution stemming from the Rice decision must be measured against the federal law and the U.S. Constitution. For now, however, Ezra said the next step must come from Congress through a "careful and measured" approach.
Ezra cautioned the Hawaiian community and the state to "step back and take a deep breath" so that cooler heads prevail.
"Today, we do not know and we can not know the ultimate significance of what this case may be.... There is no need to rush to what could ultimately be an unsatisfactory result," he said.
A hearing on OHA's motion to intervene was set for April 24. OHA attorneys told Ezra today they will withdraw the motion if Ezra agreed to the stipulation.
The semiautonomous agency was never a party to the case that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, but trustees felt they had to intervene once the court issued its groundbreaking Feb. 23 opinion that opened up OHA elections to all Hawaii registered voters and not just to those of Hawaiian ancestry.
Trustees felt the decision would impair their ability to protect OHA's trust assets and therefore wanted to be a part to any proceedings held by Ezra.
U.S. Public Law 103-150
