Hawaiʻi Supreme Court Orders Office of Elections to Answer Petition Over Refusal to Support Elections Commission

Hawaiʻi Supreme Court Orders Office of Elections to Answer Petition Over Refusal to Support Elections Commission

Court gives state agency until July 24 to explain why it would not help the Commission meet; petitioners may reply by July 29

HONOLULU, Hawaiʻi — The Hawaiʻi Supreme Court has ordered the State Office of Elections to respond, by Friday, July 24, 2026, to a petition alleging the agency unlawfully refused to provide administrative support to the Hawaiʻi Elections Commission — support the Commission needed to convene a meeting and elect a chairperson.

The July 17, 2026, order, issued in Cushnie & McKay v. Nago (SCPW-26-0000498), directs Respondents Scott T. Nago, Chief Election Officer, and the Office of Elections to address two questions:

1. Whether the Office of Elections failed or refused to provide staff support to the Elections Commission as required under Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 11-1.5(b); and
2. Whether that failure prevented the Elections Commission from meeting to elect a chairperson.

The order was signed by Acting Chief Justice Sabrina S. McKenna, Justices Todd W. Eddins and Lisa M. Ginoza, and Circuit Judges Peter T. Cahill and Dyan M. Medeiros, sitting by assignment.

Background

Petitioners Ralph S. Cushnie and Tamara McKay, Commissioners of the Hawaiʻi Elections Commission representing Kauaʻi and Maui counties respectively, filed an emergency petition for writ of mandamus on July 8, 2026. The petition states that the Commission — which has lacked a chairperson since June 30, 2026 — could not lawfully notice or convene a meeting because the Office of Elections declined to provide basic administrative support, including a remote-meeting link and distribution of meeting notices, despite HRS § 11-1.5(b)’s requirement that the Office “shall provide staff support to the elections commission, as requested by the elections commission.”

The petition further states that the Department of Accounting and General Services confirmed in writing that the statutory support obligation rests with the Office of Elections, and that the Department of the Attorney General is not authorized to convene Commission meetings on the agency’s behalf.

What Happens Next

Under the Court’s order, Respondents must file their answer by July 24, 2026. Petitioners may then file a reply of no more than ten pages by July 29, 2026.

We’ve been reporting on this for a long time.

Four Years Later, Hawaii’s Fundamental Election Certification Question Remains Unresolved