For over 100 years, Prince Kūhiō’s Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA) has represented a promise by the United States to the Native Hawaiian people recognizing that our rehabilitation required returning us to our ʻāina. That promise remains as important today as ever.
For more than 10,000 of us homesteading families, the HHCA is not simply a housing program. It is the foundation for rebuilding our families, preserving our culture, strengthening our communities and ensuring that future generations remain connected to our ancestral homeland and culture.
For the more than 30,000 still waiting, it represents hope that one day, they too, will be awarded a land allotment.
Today, that promise is under attack with the Ryan v. Watson lawsuit which argues that the HHCA’s eligibility requirements violate the Equal Protection Clause because they are based upon Native Hawaiian ancestry (race) instead of being available to everyone.
The lawsuit is part of a broader national legal movement that has increasingly challenged programs associated with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), affirmative action, and other initiatives designed to remedy historic injustice.
Native Hawaiian institutions have become frequent targets.
Recent lawsuits have challenged admissions policies at Kamehameha Schools, Native Hawaiian health scholarship programs of Papa Ola Lōkahi, and now our Hawaiian Homes trust.
While each case involves different legal questions, they share a common theme: treating programs created to address the unique history of Native Hawaiians as ordinary racial classifications rather than as the political and trust obligations established by Congress.
We, at the Sovereign Council for Hawaiian Homestead Associations and other HHCA supporters, argue that this comparison misses a fundamental point: the Hawaiian Homes trust was created by federal law, incorporated into Hawaiʻi’s Admission Act, and has been reaffirmed repeatedly through federal legislation recognizing the United States’ special trust responsibilities toward Native Hawaiians.
From this perspective, the HHCA is not merely a race-conscious housing program, but part of a longstanding federal trust relationship with Hawaiʻi’s Indigenous people.
Defending the HHCA will require more than courtroom arguments. Native Hawaiian organizations, homestead associations, beneficiaries, elected officials and community leaders must continue educating the public about why the HHCA exists and the historical injustices it was intended to address.
Congress should reaffirm its trust responsibilities through additional legislation where appropriate. Our Kauaʻi County Council unanimously passed a resolution introduced by me and Chair Mel Rapozo. Other counties are doing so as well. The State of Hawaiʻi and all counties should continue filing strong legal defenses and supporting amicus briefs that explain the unique political and historical status of Native Hawaiians.
Finally, the best defense of our trust is fulfilling its promise by reducing the waiting list and delivering more homesteads to beneficiaries.
The HHCA has never been about granting special privileges. It was created to remedy the devastating dispossession of an Indigenous people whose population, land base, language and culture had suffered extraordinary loss.
Protecting the HHCA means protecting Prince Kūhiō’s solemn promise – not only for today’s homesteaders and waitlisters, but for every eligible Native Hawaiian that he intended forever.
 has represented a promise by the United States to the Native Hawaiian people recognizing that our rehabilitation required returning us to our ʻāina.){kind=link}