Hawaii’s Two High Courts—For, By, and Of the People…Or Not?
There are only two words that come to mind when the people of Hawaii think of the Bishop Estate: broken trust.
Though the name may sound foreign to most US citizens, the Bishop Estate was, for a long time, the nation’s wealthiest trust with assets valued in excess of $11 billion. Established by Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop’s will in 1884 “to educate the children of Hawaii,” the trust’s revenue from investments were to be directed solely towards the Kamehameha Schools, a college-prep academy where admission is gained through proof of Native Hawaiian ancestry (Hawaii Reporter). The trust’s holdings now include 337,000 acres of Princess Bishop’s royal lands, which it leases to local businesses and homeowners.
A board of five trustees appointed by the State Supreme Court govern the policies of the school and the finances of the trust — with near-absolute power. Three decades’ worth of LA and NY Times stories on the Bishop saga painted a story of corruption in an estate mired in mismanagement. In the late 90’s, when trustees started meddling aggressively with school affairs, the Court finally ordered their ouster as well as the sale of its leaseholds to homeowners (Purdum 1997).
The irony behind it all lies in the Bishop trustees’ failure to carry out its founding purpose, neglecting the education of its native Hawaiian students in favor of personally beneficial and shady business practices. Hawaiian students, faculty, alumni, and parents brought suit against the Estate — the very beneficiaries it had been created to serve. There is another growing issue, however, that threatens both Hawaiians and the Estate — recent suits against the Kamehameha Schools’ racial preference in admissions. With thin parallels to affirmative action, it raises questions about whether the Estate’s policies — or even its very existence — is legal or not. In order to answer such questions, it is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the context behind the Bishop Estate’s creation. Though legal jurisprudence has so far sided with the Bishop Estate, will it continue to do so if it has become more of a business monopoly than a charitable organization? How will this complex dynamic between the Estate and its beneficiaries affect the advancement of Hawaiians and the racial privileges they currently enjoy under the law? It would be necessary to explore also the historical and current roles that the Estate has played for Hawaiians in the community, as well as how changes to the Estate may impact them.
Press, The Associated. “Hawaii Trust Board Is Ousted Amid Concern by the I.R.S. (Published 1999).” The New York Times, The New York Times, www.nytimes.com/1999/05/09/us/hawaii-trust-board-is-ousted-amid-concern-by-the-irs.html.
Purdum, Todd S. “Hawaiians Clash With Trustees of Estate-Run School.” Bishop Estate in Hawaii, New York Times, 14 Oct. 1997, sunnycv.com/steve/ar/17/article-hawaii1.html.
Slater, Dan. “Kamehameha School Controversy Bubbles Up Again; Dueling Suits Filed.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 7 Aug. 2008, www.wsj.com/articles/BL-LB-6278.
