State Supreme Court rules against Office of Elections

Hawai’i Supreme Court Rules Chief Elections Officer Violated The Law

For Immediate Release
From the office of Lance D. Collins
July 19, 2016

HONOLULU – The Hawai’i Supreme Court today ruled that the Chief Elections Officers violated state law when conducting the 2012 general election.

The case was originally filed on Maui in 2012 by the Green Party of Hawai’i and seven registered voters from across the state, from different political parties, due to widespread problems at various polling sites across the state – including 57 voters who were denied the right to vote.

The Green Party and individual voters alleged that three aspects of the running of the 2012 general election violated state law Chapter 91, HRS: (1) the formula for determining how many ballots to print, (2) the process for obtaining additional ballots when a precinct runs out, and (3) the procedure for counting a ballot that has been cast in the wrong precinct.

The Chief Elections Officer claimed that those formulas and procedures were “internal management of the agency” and not subject to the public notice and hearing and publication requirements.

Both the trial court and the Intermediate Court of Appeals ruled in the Chief Elections Officer’s favor.

In rejecting the Chief Elections Officer’s defense, however, the Supreme Court noted that the “internal management” exception to formal rule-making is a very limited exception that cannot be used when the regulations “affect private rights or public procedures”.

The Supreme Court ruled that ballots shortages “may result in the deprivation of the right to vote” and so regulations that can cause ballot shortages are not merely the “internal management of the agency.”

Attorney Lance D. Collins said: “This clarification strongly supports the purpose and intent of the Hawai’i Administrative Procedure Act – which is to provide openness and transparency in government.”


Discover more from i L i n d

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

2 thoughts on “State Supreme Court rules against Office of Elections

  1. Ketchup

    Office of Elections could’ve even done informal rulemaking and still satisfied HAPA. It’s been an interesting couple of years for administrative law jurisprudence.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.