Today must be election contest day at the Hawaii Supreme Court. We say that because the court today disposed of all three election contests which were filed stemming from the postponed Puna precincts primary and other primary election problems.

Earlier, we posted the court’s order dismissing for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction the original jurisidiction action filed by several voters from Puna and the ACLU Hawaii, which asked the court to allow them to vote because they were prevented by the tropical storm which whacked the Big Island on primary day. Now we have decisions on the merits in the other two election contests which were filed by the deadline.

In Waikiki v. Nago, No. SCEC-14-0001072 (Aug. 28, 2014), the court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law, and held that an election contest which complained about the state’s Chief Election Officer temporarily misplacing 800 Maui County votes…

Continue Reading The Other Two Election Contests To The Postponed Puna Precincts Primary Also Dismissed

Here’s the Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, just filed in Lathers v. Abercrombie, No. SCOT-14-0001069 (Aug. 28, 2014).

That’s the original jurisidiction action filed by several voters from Puna and the ACLU Hawaii, which asked the court to allow them to vote because they were prevented by the tropical storm which whacked the Big Island on primary day. 

The State defendants sought dismissal, and the court agreed that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction:

Plaintiffs concede that their complaint is “not a typical ‘election contest’” within the meaning of HRS §§ 11-172 (2009) or 11-173.5 (2009) and that they do not meet the statutory requirements for an election contest. Further, the court does not have jurisdiction under the statutory and constitutional provisions cited in the Complaint and First Amended Complaint to grant the relief requested. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motions to dismiss are granted. The…

Continue Reading HAWSCT Dismisses Postponed Puna Precincts Primary Challenge

Update: an astute reader notes that “election contests” in the Hawaii Supreme Court actually have their own separate designation in the case numbering system, “EC.” Thus, a election challenge is labeled as “SCEC-xxxxxxx.” Which means that, for whatever reason, the ACLU’s case which we posted on below and earlier was not labeled as an election challenge at all, but as an “Other.” We don’t think that the case designation or numbering has any substantive effect, mind you, but do find it interesting that the complaint calls the action an “election challenge” yet it’s neither labeled as such, nor was the jurisdiction of the court invoked under the election challenge statute. A big mahalo for the input. 

+++++++++++++++++++++

You can tell what kind of case is before what Hawaii appellate court by the case designation at the top of the fist page flysheet. First two letters are the court, second…

Continue Reading Great SCOT! Actually, No “SCOT” According To State: ACLU Complaint About Postponed Puna Primary Not An “Election Contest”