Thursday, February 05, 2009


So where is Obama on the “ceded lands” dispute now before the US Supreme Court?

by Larry Geller

We wondered where the Obama Administration would come down in the dispute, considering our new president's hometown ties to the Aloha State. Here's the answer: In an amicus brief filed last week, the Justice Department is supporting Hawaii's position. (It also requested 10 minutes of argument time at the Court.) The brief, signed by acting Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, says the U.S. has key interests, including military bases, on the disputed land.

The argument is set for Feb. 25. [American, In Supreme Court Aloha State Land Dispute, It's Wilmer v. W&C, 2/5/2009]

The same website has another article, Who Owns 1.2 Million Acres in Hawaii? Waxman, Williams & Connolly Headed to SCOTUS to Find Out (2/5/2009) which describes the case and closes with this curious comment:

The case also brings in claims of moral law. The Williams & Connolly brief includes this sentence: "Regardless whether Native Hawaiians have legal claims to ceded land, however, they clearly have broader moral and political claims." It will be interesting to hear what the justices make of this.

I thought that was curious, because lawyers are supposed to deal with the law as it is written and interpreted. I didn’t think morality figured into it much. Seriously. If it did, Native Americans would have had justice a long time ago. If it did, the US would not be allowed to detain anyone indefinitely or practice torture. If it did, we wouldn’t be in an illegal war in Iraq.

If there were such a thing as moral law, Hawaii would not be a state now.

If you would like to read over some of the amicus briefs, try this site. Another is this one.



Post a Comment

Requiring those Captcha codes at least temporarily, in the hopes that it quells the flood of comment spam I've been receiving.

<< Home


page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Newer›  ‹Older