Matsukawa v. State of Hawaii 2011 Reapportionment Commission.

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 6, 2012
DocketSCPW-11-0000741
StatusPublished

This text of Matsukawa v. State of Hawaii 2011 Reapportionment Commission. (Matsukawa v. State of Hawaii 2011 Reapportionment Commission. ) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matsukawa v. State of Hawaii 2011 Reapportionment Commission. , (haw 2012).

Opinion

*** FOR PUBLICATION IN W EST'S HAW AI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***

Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-11-0000741 06-JAN-2012 03:24 PM

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

---o0o---

NO. SCPW-11-0000732

MALAMA SOLOMON, STATE SENATOR, 1ST SENATORIAL DISTRICT; LOUIS HAO; PATRICIA A. COOK; and STEVEN G. PAVAO, Petitioners,

vs.

NEIL ABERCROMBIE, GOVERNOR, STATE OF HAWAI#I; SCOTT NAGO, CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER, STATE OF HAWAI#I; STATE OF HAWAI#I 2011 REAPPORTIONMENT COMMISSION; VICTORIA MARKS; LORRIE LEE STONE; ANTHONY TAKITANI; CALVERT CHIPCHASE IV; ELIZABETH MOORE; CLARICE Y. HASHIMOTO; HAROLD S. MASUMOTO; DYLAN NONAKA; and TERRY E. THOMASON, Respondents. -----------------------------------------------------------------

NO. SCPW-11-0000741

MICHAEL J. MATSUKAWA, Petitioner,

STATE OF HAWAI#I 2011 REAPPORTIONMENT COMMISSION; and SCOTT NAGO, CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER, STATE OF HAWAI#I, Respondents.

NOS. SCPW-11-0000732 and SCPW-11-0000741

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

JANUARY 6, 2012

Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ. *** FOR PUBLICATION IN W EST'S HAW AI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***

Per Curiam. In these related original proceedings, the

petitioners petitioned this court pursuant to the Hawai#i

Constitution, article IV, section 10, quoted infra, for: (1) a

judgment invalidating the 2011 Final Reapportionment Plan for the

state legislature adopted and filed on September 26, 2011 by the

State of Hawai#i 2011 Reapportionment Commission; (2) a writ of

mandamus directing the Reapportionment Commission to prepare and

file a new reapportionment plan for the state legislature; and

(3) a writ of mandamus directing the Chief Election Officer to

rescind the publication of the 2011 Final Reapportionment Plan.

On January 4, 2012, we issued orders granting the

petitions. We concluded that the 2011 Final Reapportionment Plan

is constitutionally invalid because: (1) the Hawai#i

Constitution, article IV, section 4, expressly mandates that only

permanent residents be counted in the population base for the

purpose of reapportionment and (2) the 2011 Final Reapportionment

Plan disregards this constitutional mandate by including non-

permanent residents in the population base that the

Reapportionment Commission used to allocate the members of the

state legislature among the basic island units. We invalidated

the 2011 Final Reapportionment Plan and directed the

Reapportionment Commission to prepare and file a new

reapportionment plan that: (1) allocates the members of the state

legislature among the basic island units by using a permanent

resident population base, and then (2) apportions the members

2 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN W EST'S HAW AI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER ***

among the districts therein as provided by article IV, section 6.

We further directed the Chief Election Officer to rescind the

publication of the 2011 Final Reapportionment Plan for the state

legislature.

I. BACKGROUND

A.

The Hawai#i Constitution, article IV (Reapportionment),

requires, every tenth year after 1981, reapportionment for the

state legislature and congressional districts. Reapportionment

is effected by a reapportionment plan filed by a nine-member

reapportionment commission constituted in the reapportionment

year.

Article IV, as originally enacted in 1978, provided for

reapportionment of the state legislature by requiring allocation

-- among the four basic island units of the 25 senatorial

districts and the 51 house of representative districts -- "on the

basis of the number of voters registered in the last preceding

general election." Though the registered voter basis was upheld

as constitutional by the United States Supreme Court because it

approximated a plan based on a permissible population base,1 the

1991 Reapportionment Commission concluded, after analyzing its

data, that use of the voter registration basis would not result

in a constitutionally permissible apportionment plan. It

1 Burns v. Richardson, 384 U.S. 73, 96 (1966)

3 selected, as an alternative apportionment base, the permanent

resident population, identified as the total population derived

from the 1990 census, less transients. It hired a research firm

to "determine which transients were counted in the census, how

many there were and whether or not they could be located in

specific census blocks." The research firm, upon consultation,

reported to the 1991 Reapportionment Commission that "the

nonresident military is the only large, census-block-identifiable

group of nonresidents included in the census" and that "other

groups, such as nonresident students, are statistically

insignificant and cannot be easily placed in specific census

blocks." The 1991 Reapportionment Commission thereupon decided

to exclude, from the permanent resident population base,

nonresident military personnel and their dependents as

constituting "the vast majority of transients included in the

census counts." It stated, in its final reapportionment plan,

that "exclusion of nonresident military from the census data will

come as close as possible to the desired permanent resident base

for legislative reapportionment" because: (1) nonresident

military then constituted about 114,000 or 14% of Hawaii's

population; (2) most military personnel considered Hawai#i a

temporary home and only 3% opted to become Hawai#i citizens; and

(3) 98% of military dependents claimed the same residency as the

military member of the family.

4 The 1991 Reapportionment Commission's final

reapportionment plan was the basis, in the 1992 legislative

session, for House Bill 2327 to amend article IV of the Hawai#i

Constitution to change the state legislature apportionment base

from registered voters to permanent resident population "based on

the 1991 Reapportionment Commission's Final Reapportionment Plan"

and "the reasons set forth in [the] Plan." House Bill 2327 was

enacted by the 1992 legislature and article IV of the Hawai#i

Constitution was amended by Hawai#i voters in 1992 to its present

form.

ARTICLE IV REAPPORTIONMENT . . . . APPORTIONMENT AMONG BASIC ISLAND UNITS

Section 4. The [reapportionment] commission shall allocate the total number of members of each house of the state legislature being reapportioned among the four basic island units, namely: (1) the island of Hawaii, (2) the islands of Maui, Lanai, Molokai and Kahoolawe, (3) the island of Oahu and all other islands not specifically enumerated, and (4) the islands of Kauai and Niihau, using the total number of permanent residents in each of the basic island units and computed by the method known as the method of equal proportions; except that no basic island unit shall receive less than one member in each house. . . . . APPORTIONMENT WITHIN BASIC ISLAND UNITS

Section 6.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Burns v. Richardson
384 U.S. 73 (Supreme Court, 1966)
Convention Center Authority v. Anzai
890 P.2d 1197 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Matsukawa v. State of Hawaii 2011 Reapportionment Commission. , Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matsukawa-v-state-of-hawaii-2011-reapportionment-commission-haw-2012.