Skip to comments.SCOTUS: OHA's strange concessions in "Ceded Lands" Oral Arguments
Posted on 02/27/2009 9:27:11 PM PST by AndrewWalden
At first, it was a bit odd to see Washington, D.C. attorney Kannon Shanmugam, counsel for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in the "ceded lands" case immediately concede in oral argument that the U.S. Supreme Court should rule against OHA -- and hold the Apology Resolution was simply a symbolic statement of regret -- if the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision relied on it. Responding to a question from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, he stated:
"Let me -- let me be clear about this, Justice Ginsburg, if the Hawaii Supreme Court's opinion is read to construe the Apology Resolution as creating some affirmative duty or obligation as a matter of Federal law, we agree that that would be erroneous...."
(Excerpt) Read more at hawaiifreepress.com ...
WHICH BEING INTERPRETED = ????
How about a summary of implications?
This week, on February 25, the US Supreme Court will be hearing Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. Housing and Community Dev. Corp. of Hawaii, which will decide whether the Hawaii Supreme Court was correct to rule that a 1993 Congressional Resolution apologizing for the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom gives native Hawaiians a claim on 1.2 million acres of Hawaii real estate known as the ceded lands.’ These lands, so named because the US ceded’ them back to the State upon admission in 1959, comprise 29% of the State’s total land mass and almost all of the land owned by the State of Hawaii.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.