Posted on 09/23/2005 12:48:51 PM PDT by freespirited
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration continues to question whether the Constitution would allow Native Hawaiians to form their own government, according to a Justice Department official.
While Justice attorneys have worked through a host of issues dealing with Hawaiian gambling, military readiness and civil and criminal jurisdictions, underlying legal questions remain about creating an all-Hawaiian entity.
"There are substantial unresolved Constitutional concerns regarding whether Congress may treat the Native Hawaiians as it does Indian tribes and whether Congress may establish and recognize a Native Hawaiian entity," said Justice Department spokesman John Nowacki.
The Justice Department statement comes less than a week after Hawaii lawmakers issued a press release Friday touting a new Native Hawaiian bill they negotiated over the summer with the Bush administration. It also provides the opposition some added firepower in the Senate when it takes up the bill later this year.
The bill would grant roughly 400,000 Native Hawaiians the right to organize and negotiate for self-rule from the state and federal governments.
In an effort to win passage in the Senate, Hawaii lawmakers scaled back provisions on gaming and shielded the federal and state governments from Hawaiian settlement claims for land and resources. As many as six Republicans have blocked the bill from coming to a vote on the Senate floor.
Senate leaders postponed scheduled action earlier this month on the Native Hawaiian bill to respond to Hurricane Katrina. No date has been rescheduled for the debate.
Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, issued a statement Wednesday reaffirming the delegation's earlier agreement with the Justice Department.
"Every practical policy issue raised by DOJ in our negotiations has been addressed and resolved," Akaka said. "Although I realize and respect that there are those who have differing views, I feel strongly that the bill is Constitutional."
Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawaii, pointed to 150 years of Indian case law allowing Congress to recognize indigenous peoples of the United States, including Native Hawaiians.
"Anytime an opponent of a proposition wants to slow it down, one of the quivers in the arsenal is its constitutionality in the courts," Case said. "The question should and will ultimately be decided by the courts."
Critics of a Hawaiian government have repeatedly warned it would violate the Constitution by allowing a single racial entity to operate within the United States.
In raising the constitutional concern, Nowacki cited the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Rice vs. Cayetano. In that 2000 case, the court ruled elections for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs should be open to all state residents, not just Native Hawaiians. The Hawaiian governing entity would only be open to Hawaiians.
"As the Supreme Court has stated, whether Native Hawaiians are eligible for tribal states is 'a matter of some dispute' and 'of considerable moment and difficulty,'" Nowacki said.
Honolulu attorney Bill Burgess, who has flown to Washington several times to lobby against the bill, welcomed the Justice Department's latest interpretation.
"The electorate (in the bill) is restrictive to the very same group in Rice v. Cayetano which was held to be in violation of the 15th amendment," Burgess said.
Akaka and Case said the federal courts should ultimately decide whether a Native Hawaiian government would be constitutional. But for that to happen, Congress must first pass the bill.
"I believe firmly in Congress' authority to extend the federal policy of self-governance and self-determination to Native Hawaiians, Hawaii's indigenous people," Akaka said.
Would these self-governing and self-determining Hawaiians accept a responsibility to be self-sufficient, or would they still expect all sorts of federal benefits?
I think we all know the answer to that question...
What did the founders say about Hawaii?
"self-governing and self-determining Hawaiians"
NO WAY!
If they get special rights, G-D`it I want special rights too.
I think we all know the answer to that.
Let the Hawaiians have their own nation. 49 states is enough for US.
They can export pineapple, sugar, and vacations to Americans.
But NO foreign aid to them.
.
Now you're talking. Let's get a bill passed to make FReepers a self-determining and self-governing group. Haven't we been oppressed too?
"What did the founders say about Hawaii?"
Excellent analysis. Thanks.
" Let's get a bill passed to make FReepers a self-determining and self-governing group"
LOL
But otherwise their situation is not analogous to that of American Indians, who were represented by governments (tribes) that made legitimate treaties with the government of the United States.
Akaka is a Japanese name is it not? Of course that doen't mean he's not 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16 .. or 1/256ths Native Hawaian.
They ought to scare up some Hawaiian with royal blood. He or she could be declared Alii Nui. Then every other native Hawaiian should be rounded up and shipped to that island. Now, since we want true tradition here, everyone who isn't Alii Nui will naturally be a slave of the Alii Nui. A few of them will need to be killed immediately for walking on the shadow of the Alii Nui, but it's a small price to pay for tradition.
The lasses, of course, will want to make themselves available to all passing sailors for a few pennies. Sounds more like paradise the more I think of it. What a liberty port!
I happen to think the sugar revolution was one of the true black marks in American history. I also think the Calvinists missionaries that first went to convert the islands had no clue on humanity or Christianity.
Still, anyone that harkens back to the days of the Monarchy are just a bit twisted in their own style.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.