Latest On The Hawaiians-Only-Oprah/Costco-Everyone-Wins Election

Latest On The Hawaiians-Only-Oprah/Costco-Everyone-Wins Election

by Robert Thomas, InverseCondemnation, December 18, 2015

Here's the latest on the now-cancelled "Nai Aupuni" Hawaiians-only poll/election, described by one local commentator as having "the integrity of a Costco membership," and by Election law maven Rick Hasen as the "Oprah" theory of elections after the organization cancelled the extended vote and invited all candidates to come to the convention once the U.S. Supreme Court enjoined the counting of ballots and certification of the election (in other words, all candidates were elected):

• Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSBlog reports that the plaintiffs have asked the Ninth Circuit for a two-week extension of time to file their merits briefs. See the motion here. In the motion, the plaintiffs outline their possible responses to the new development (the cancellation of the election and the seating of all candidates): "Moreover, this factual development may change the litigation in ways more fundamental than alteration of briefs. In particular, possible responses and outcomes range from seeking further injunctive relief from the Supreme Court to dismissal of the appeal and/or the litigation." ("A new test on Hawaii's future?"). 
• At least one observer, U. Hawaiil lawprof Williamson B.C. Chang, thinks that holding the convention with all delegates invited is the "ultimate, 'in-your-face' insult" to the U.S. Supreme Court, because Justice Kennedy's injunction "was clearly intended to prevent the formation and gathering of any 'winners,' no matter how selected (and even if there are no 'losers'), that could comprise a constitutional convention. He sees an agenda here. 
• "Dueling Lawsuits: Did Nai Aupuni Allow Too Few Voters? Too Many?" (by Anita Hofschneider at Honolulu Civil Beat). 
• The stipends that the organization is offering to those candidates/delegates who show up to the convention. Just whose money is this? 

Although Nai Aupuni said the Ninth Circuit appeal was moot ... maybe not, so stay tuned.

---30---