-Caveat Lector-

This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED]



School Set Aside for Hawaiians Ends Exclusion to Cries of Protest

July 27, 2002
By ADAM LIPTAK






HONOLULU, July 24 - The modern history of Hawaii is, in the
view of many people here, a series of tragedies and crimes.
The native population was decimated by Western diseases,
its monarchy was overthrown by Western businessmen, and its
culture and language were for generations actively
suppressed.

But one shining thing always belonged to native Hawaiians.
The Kamehameha Schools, the only beneficiary of the $6
billion legacy of a 19th-century Hawaiian princess,
educates native Hawaiian children - and only native
Hawaiian children.

It thus came as a wrenching surprise to many here when the
schools recently admitted a student not of Hawaiian
ancestry. School policy requires students to prove that at
least one ancestor lived on the Hawaiian Islands in 1778,
when Capt. James Cook arrived. The competition for
admission is intense, and few native Hawaiians make the
cut.

The decision to accept the student, Kalani Rosell, into the
eighth grade on the schools' Maui campus was driven in part
by a concern that the admission policy cannot survive legal
scrutiny. The move has set off furious protests, rooted in
historical grievances, cultural differences and the
conviction that the legal categories developed by mainland
courts to promote racial equality cannot address the needs
of a multiracial society that was a monarchy little more
than a century ago.

"An attempt by kings and queens to help their people has
not meshed well with American law," said Beadie Kanahele
Dawson, a lawyer here.

The schools' main campus occupies about 600 acres in the
lush hills above Honolulu's harbor. Some 3,200 students,
from kindergarten through 12th grade, use its 70 buildings,
Olympic-sized swimming pool and sports stadium. The view
from almost anywhere on campus is so stunning that its
beauty is not lost even on teenagers.

Another 1,200 students attend the schools' two other
campuses on Maui and the Big Island, and the schools
sponsor many other programs from preschool through college.
All the programs together reach less than 10 percent of all
the children who meet the ancestry requirements.
High-school tuition for day students, which is heavily
subsidized, is about $1,400.

"If you are a kid with Hawaiian blood and pass the test and
get into Kamehameha Schools, man, you have just hit the
lottery," said Daniel B. Boylan, a history professor at the
University of Hawaii.

Haunani-Kay Trask, a professor of Hawaiian studies at the
university, said the schools were unprepared for the outcry
over the decision to admit Kalani Rosell, a 12-year-old boy
described as a straight-A student and a champion swimmer.

"It really hurt people," Ms. Trask said, "and the pain was
so palpable you could almost smell people's anger." At a
meeting to discuss the matter last week, alumni angrily
attacked the schools' trustees.

"They just got it frontally, full blast, both barrels," Ms.
Trask said.

John Tehranian, a University of Utah law professor who has
written on the schools' tax status, said the trustees were
missing the point.

"Forget all the legal arguments," Professor Tehranian said.
"There are profound emotions here. This is the last thing
that native Hawaiians have."

At the meeting with alumni, J. Douglas Ing, chairman of the
trust's board, likened the issue to chess.

"There are those in this country that would like to erode
if not eliminate rights for indigenous and native people,"
Mr. Ing said. "We're attempting to protect the admissions
policy. To do that it may be necessary for us to give up a
pawn here and a pawn there."

In an interview in the campus library here, the schools'
chief executive, Hamilton McCubbin, said that powerful
societal and legal forces were challenging the admissions
policy. "We're working against the waves," he said.

But the admissions decision appears to have backfired on
all fronts. It has drawn attention to the issue at a time
when the schools hope to avoid legal scrutiny, and it has
alienated the schools' own constituencies.

"I assume," said John Goemans, a lawyer who has been active
in challenging preferences for people of Hawaiian ancestry,
"that this was a surfeit of would-be cleverness."

Dr. McCubbin acknowledged the unpopularity of the Rosell
admission.

"Many, many people thought the decision of the Kamehameha
Schools was a betrayal," he said. "The perception is that
if there is any entity that can stand up to the
anti-affirmative-action, anti-entitlement forces, it's the
Kamehameha Schools."

He emphasized, though, that the issue was not race-based.
"Ancestral roots have significant meaning for Hawaiian
people," he said. "It is that linkage to ancestral roots
that defines who you are."

In one sense the school, like the state, is remarkably
diverse racially. In a recent school year, 78 percent of
the students said they were part Caucasian, 74 percent said
they were part Chinese, 28 percent said they were part
Japanese, and 24 percent said they were of other
ancestries, including African-American, Arab, Brazilian,
Indian, Alaska Native and American Indian.

The requirement of one pre-1778 Hawaiian ancestor means
that many students are of Hawaiian descent in only a quite
attenuated sense.

"My goodness," said Gladys Brandt, a former principal of
the Kamehameha Schools, "you're one-twenty-fourth Hawaiian,
you're in." Indeed, assuming nine intervening generations,
children who are less than one-five-hundredth original
Hawaiian may qualify.

When asked about the legal significance of the decision to
admit Kalani Rosell, Dr. McCubbin started to answer but was
interrupted by Colleen I. Wong, the schools' chief lawyer,
who told him not to respond.

Through a representative, Kalani Rosell's mother and father
declined a request for an interview.

The schools have recently dropped several federally
supported programs to avoid challenges to its admissions
policy. Their key remaining fear is that the trust's
tax-exempt status will be revoked, which would cost the
schools perhaps $80 million a year. They might also be
liable, according to their former accountants, for back
taxes of $1 billion.

The trust was created by the will of Bernice Pauahi Bishop,
the great-granddaughter and last direct descendant of
Kamehameha I, the 18th-century king who unified the
Hawaiian Islands. The princess, who died in 1884, left some
400,000 acres, including a prime tract on Waikiki Beach, to
the schools.

In 1999, an earlier board of trustees was ousted under
pressure from the Internal Revenue Service, which
threatened to revoke the trust's tax-exempt status during
an investigation of financial mismanagement and
self-dealing.

The new trustees, who adopted a more transparent management
style, disappointed many in their handling of the
admissions decision.

"They've been given legal advice that they should be quite
cautious," Jon M. Van Dyke, a University of Hawaii law
professor, said. "But something is lost if they move away
from the exclusive ancestry criteria. The schools are the
only forum in which native Hawaiians can get together as
native Hawaiians."

Mr. Goemans said he planned a class-action lawsuit against
the Kamehameha Schools. "I would hope that by this fall the
racially exclusive policy will be dropped by the school,"
he said. "If they were smart, they would roll over."

In 2000, in a lawsuit litigated by Mr. Goemans, the United
States Supreme Court dealt a blow to the cause of
preferences for people of Hawaiian descent. The state had
limited the right to vote for the trustees of a state
agency to people who could prove Hawaiian ancestry; the
court ruled that limitation violated the Fifteenth
Amendment, which concerns voting rights.

The court also rejected two of the general premises on
which the arguments in favor of preferences for people of
Hawaiian ancestry were built.

The court first held that native Hawaiians are not
historically or legally akin to American Indians on the
mainland. The court said that preferences enjoyed by
Indians were permissible because they are based on
politics, not race. The court reasoned that Indian tribes
are political units.

But Hawaiians, the court held, have no similar political
status that would insulate such preferences from
challenges.

The court also held that the requirement of proof of
Hawaiian ancestry was a proxy for race. Racial
distinctions, at least when they are made by the
government, are almost always forbidden.

In the context of private entities, the Supreme Court has
ruled that race discrimination can result in the loss of
tax-exempt status. In 1983, the court held that taxpayers
should not be made to support the discriminatory policies
of Bob Jones University, at least when "there can be no
doubt that the activity involved is contrary to fundamental
public policy."

Many legal scholars say that the two Supreme Court cases
spell trouble for the Kamehameha Schools.

The Rosell decision was said by the schools to have been a
product of ordinary admissions criteria. All qualified
applicants of Hawaiian descent were admitted, the schools
said, leaving one open slot.

"It's not only insulting," Professor Trask said of this
explanation, "it's also untrue. I'm sure they accepted a
non-Hawaiian because they were afraid of getting sued."

Samuel P. King, a federal judge here, said the schools
misplayed this aspect of the decision. "It was a mistake to
say you couldn't find a Hawaiian," he said. "That's like
putting a red flag in front of a bull."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/27/education/27HAWA.html?ex=1028768459&ei=1&en=56449aad95cd24ba



HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
or other creative advertising opportunities with The
New York Times on the Web, please contact
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit our online media
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to