Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 22, Number 11, 1 November 2005 — Arakaki suit plaintiffs seek rehearing Group hopes to have its full constitutional challenge to Hawaiian programs reinstated by appeals court [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Arakaki suit plaintiffs seek rehearing Group hopes to have its full constitutional challenge to Hawaiian programs reinstated by appeals court

By Sterling Kini Wnng Publicatiūns Editor The plaintiffs in the lawsuit that seeks to have OHA and other Hawaiian programs declared unconstitutional have asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its recent ruling in the case. In August, a three-member panel of the appeals court partially affirmed a lower court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' case in the Arakaki v. Lingle suit, ruling that, as state taxpayers, they do not have standing to challenge federally mandated programs, such as the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and OHA's use of ceded lands revenue. However, the court did allow the plaintiffs to sue over OHA's use of

state tax funds, whieh amount to about 10 percent of the agency's total $28 million annual budget. The appeals court sent the case back to federal district court in Hawai'i for a retrial on the state tax revenue issue. H. William Burgess, the attorney for former Honolulu polieeman Earl Arakaki and the 13 other plaintiffs in the case, told the press after the ruling that his clients were "disappointed that the court narrowed the scope of our suit as mueh as it did" and hoped to have their full challenge reinstated. In their request for reconsideration, the plaintiffs are asking that either the same three-mem-ber panel rehear the case, or that an ll-member panel of judges review the case and render a ruling. The group argues that the

appeals court's iniīial ruling runs counter to previous 9th Circuit Court and U.S. Supreme Court rulings, and that it sets "unprecedented restrictions" on taxpayer challenges. H

NŪ HOU • NEWSBRIEFS

H. William Burgess, attorney for the Amkala plaintiffs, says his clienfs were "disappointed that the court narrowed our suit as mueh as it did." - Phoio: KWO Archive