Editorial
Hawaiian lawsuit defeat hardly settles issue

The smiles surrounding a federal judge's decision to throw out a case challenging Hawaiian-only entitlements will surely not last long.

While Judge David Ezra's reasoning in rejecting the suit by plaintiff Patrick Barrett was sound, it was clearly a technical ruling. That is, the fundamental underlying questions surrounding the issue of Hawaiian-only programs and entitlements remain unanswered and unresolved.

Barrett claimed that programs such as the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Hawaiian Home Lands program are unconstitutional because their benefits are available only to people of the Hawaiian race.

Ezra threw out the case on grounds that Barrett had not shown that his constitutional rights were actually damaged since he had not seriously applied for the benefits. In short, you cannot bring a constitutional case on purely philosophical grounds.

This is far from the end of the matter. Either this case will be appealed or another complaint will be found that can get past Ezra's technical threshold.

This is why those battling to retain Hawaiian programs and entitlements must not be content with the belief that the courts will eventually take care of them. In fact, as the lawsuit over Hawaiian-only voting for OHA demonstrated, the legal tide may be running against such group entitlements.

In the short run, there is need for action from Congress to protect Hawaiian programs by creating a nation-to-nation relationship with Hawaiians.

But in the long run, the greatest good will come from a form of self-determination in which Hawaiians decide for themselves what is best for their ohana, and then set about making it happen.