ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®  – News and Updates on Religious Liberty and Freedom
Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Church and State
  • In the News
  • In the News
  • Supreme Court
  • Free Speech
  • Legislation
Menu

Hawai‘i Supreme Court Rejects Roberts Court Path in Establishment Clause Ruling

Posted on September 19, 2025 by

On September 12, 2025, the Hawai‘i Supreme Court voided a 1922 deed restriction that forced land in Hilo to be used only “for Church purposes.” The justices concluded that such a condition violated article I, section 4 of the Hawai‘i Constitution, which prohibits laws “respecting an establishment of religion” .

The constitutional language itself dates back to Hawai‘i’s 1950 Constitutional Convention. Delegates modeled the clause on the federal Establishment Clause, declaring they were “in full accord” with it and wanted to “avail[]” the state of federal court interpretations . When Hawai‘i formally became a state in 1959, the constitution went into effect with this language intact. It has not been substantively amended since .

The timing of Hawai‘i’s constitutional adoption is telling. Just three years before the 1950 convention, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Everson v. Board of Education (1947), a landmark case that made clear that the Establishment Clause applied to the states. Everson articulated that “Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another” . That case, along with McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) and Zorach v. Clauson (1952), framed the constitutional landscape that Hawai‘i’s framers had in mind when they wrote article I, section 4 .

In the present case, Justice Lisa Ginoza’s majority opinion struck down the deed restriction, but it was Justice Todd Eddins’ concurrence, joined by Justices Sabrina McKenna and Clyde Devens, that explicitly linked Hawai‘i’s constitutional history to its modern interpretation. Eddins contrasted Hawai‘i’s establishment clause, rooted in the Everson era of strict separation, with the Roberts Court’s more recent pivot in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022), which adopted a “history and tradition” test for federal Establishment Clause disputes .

Eddins quoted Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent in Kennedy, which warned that the Roberts Court had “reject[ed] longstanding concerns surrounding government endorsement of religion and replac[ed] the standard for reviewing such questions with a new ‘history and tradition’ test” . He argued that Hawai‘i need not, and should not, follow that narrowing path. Instead, he emphasized that Hawai‘i’s constitution—drafted and ratified at a moment when Everson defined the establishment principle—commits the state to a firmer separation of church and state than the current federal standard allows.

By grounding the ruling in Hawai‘i’s constitutional text and history, the court reaffirmed its independence from federal shifts. The deed restriction, Eddins reasoned, exemplified unconstitutional state sponsorship of religion: the government mandated land be used for religious purposes or forfeited. That, he concluded, is precisely what the Hawai‘i Constitution forbids.

With this decision, the deed restriction is void under state law. Because the ruling rests solely on Hawai‘i’s constitution, no federal appeal is expected.

Case link: Hilo Bay Marina, LLC & Keaukaha Ministry, LLC v. State of Hawai‘i, No. SCAP-23-0000310 — decision PDF

SCAP-23-0000310 PDF

Tags: Hawai‘i Supreme Court, Establishment Clause, Everson v. Board of Education, Roberts Court, concurring opinion

AI Disclaimer: This summary was prepared with the assistance of AI using the official opinion in SCAP-23-0000310. It should not be relied on as legal advice.

Category: Current Events

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

©2025 ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom® – News and Updates on Religious Liberty and Freedom
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experience, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}