Hawai'i v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs

556 U.S. 163,129 S.Ct. 1436, 173 L.Ed.2d 333 (2009)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Hawai'i v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs

United States Supreme Court
556 U.S. 163,129 S.Ct. 1436, 173 L.Ed.2d 333 (2009)

  • Written by Lauren Groth, JD

Facts

In 1959, Hawaii (defendant) was admitted into the United States. Under the Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4, the United States gave Hawaii all public lands the United States had title over to be held by Hawaii in a public trust for Native Hawaiians. In 1993, Congress passed a resolution (the Apology Resolution), acknowledging the United States’ historical involvement in the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and apologizing for the United States’ actions. Section 3 of the Apology Resolution also stated that the resolution was not intended to serve as settlement of any claims against the United States. In this case, as part of the public trust, Hawaii held a parcel of land known as the Leiali’i parcel, which it sought to sell to Hawaii’s Housing Finance Development Corporation (HFDC) for affordable housing. The HFDC was required to pay the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) (plaintiff), which managed the funds and proceeds received from the public trust. However, the OHA also required the HFDC to acknowledge that, pursuant to the Apology Resolution, native Hawaiians might have claims to the land held in the public trust, and all land sold from the public trust was sold with reservation of those possible claims. The HFDC refused. OHA sued Hawaii to prevent Hawaii from selling any lands held in the public trust, until a determination of whether native Hawaiians had any claims to the land was made. The Hawaii state court found against OHA, but the Supreme Court of Hawaii determined that the Apology Resolution required Hawaii to consider whether any outstanding native claims existed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Alito, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 790,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership