Search Results

Protecting Our Constitutional Right to Record Law Enforcement The Libertarian Party of Hawaii proudly stands in strong support of SB2145 . It stands out as one of the most important civil liberty bills of the 2026 legislative session. SB 2145 establishes a clear, explicit right of every person  in Hawaii to record law enforcement activities in public. It also creates a powerful private right of action to hold officers accountable when they illegally interfere with this fundamental right. This is constitutionally sound , commonsense , and it is deeply aligned with libertarian principles of limited government and individual liberty. SB2145 does three critical things: Clearly affirms the right of individuals who are not under arrest or in custody to record police officers performing their duties in public. Protects the recording device and the footage itself, even if the person is later arrested. Creates a strong civil remedy including punitive damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief against officers who destroy recordings, threaten citizens, seize phones, or retaliate for filming. A First Amendment Victory The right to record law enforcement is not a new concept at all. It is firmly rooted in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Multiple federal appeals courts across the country have ruled that citizens have a clearly established right to film police officers in public spaces. Recording government officials in the performance of their duties is protected speech. When police operate in public, they act on behalf of the people and the people have every right to document and scrutinize that behavior.  Hawaii’s state Constitution also guarantees free speech and due process. SB 2145 simply codifies and strengthens these protections into state law, and can put an end to the confusion and abuse that currently occurs when officers illegally order people to stop filming. Common Sense Protections for Everyone This bill is common sense for several powerful reasons: 1. It Increases Accountability : Body cameras are great, but they are controlled by the police. Citizen recordings provide an independent, unfiltered view of events. Video evidence protects the innocent and exposes misconduct. 2. It Protects Good Officers : Clear footage exonerates officers who are falsely accused of misconduct. It cuts both ways and is the best defense against false claims. 3. It Deters Abuse : When officers know they are being recorded, bad behavior declines dramatically. Transparency is a natural deterrent to excessive force and unlawful conduct. 4. It Reflects Modern Reality : Virtually every citizen carries a powerful recording device. Banning or chilling this right is both impractical and tyrannical. Why Libertarians Must Lead on This Issue Libertarianism demands that the government be transparent and accountable. When the state claims a monopoly on force, the people must have tools to check that power. SB2145 is a direct defense against government overreach. It rejects the dangerous idea that citizens must blindly trust law enforcement without the ability to verify what actually happened. If law enforcement officers have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear of this measure. Help Us Support SB2145: This bill represents a major step forward for liberty, transparency, and justice in Hawaii. We call on the full Senate and House to pass SB 2145 without weakening amendments. Take action by following these two steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text: Support SB2145 Testify . Our simple instructions make the process easy! Join Our Team! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii!   Contact us today to get tailored advice, collaboration, and support.   And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you. Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect our liberty. Keep the Momentum Going Your contributions help us track bills, craft testimony, and mobilize supporters. Consider a one-time gift or monthly support  to expand our reach and help us defend liberty session after session.

I can’t believe that it needs to be said at all, but doctors, please don’t murder infants. Don’t neglect them. Don’t violate your oaths. SB213 requires that every infant born alive receives medically appropriate and reasonable life-saving and life-sustaining care. It establishes clear civil and criminal penalties for anyone who fails to provide that care. This isn't complicated or controversial; it's basic human decency. Why do we even need a law that says don't murder infants? Doctors and medical professionals swear oaths to protect life, to "do no harm," and to act in the best interest of their patients. Yet, across the country, there have been documented cases where infants born alive were left without life-saving care. Many have been denied oxygen, warmth, or transport to a hospital, allowing them to die. These tragedies expose a dangerous lack of protection. SB 213 ends these atrocities in Hawaii by making it explicit that once a baby is born alive, they are a legal person entitled to full protection under state law. In short, don't murder infants. No exceptions, no excuses. The bill's requirements are straightforward and compassionate: Provide the same standard of care given to any other newborn at the same gestational age. Ensure immediate life-sustaining treatment where medically appropriate. Treat the infant as a full legal person with regard to rights to medical attention. Penalties apply only to those who willfully neglect or harm these vulnerable lives, but not to mothers, and not for standard medical decisions in complex situations. This aligns with federal efforts like the now stalled Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. Not Abortion Reform To be clear, SB 213 doesn't touch on abortion laws at all; it protects life after birth. Sponsors including Senators Fevella, DeCoite, and others recognize that true compassion extends to every child who takes their first breath. SB 213 removes any ambiguity, ensuring no baby is abandoned to die. This is a no-brainer measure that upholds humanity, reinforces medical ethics, and protects the innocent. Take Action: Take action by following the steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text: SUPPOR T: SB213 . Track & Testify : Our simple instructions make it easy! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii! Contact Us  if you need help, would like to volunteer, or want to stay updated. And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you . Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect Hawaii's liberty. DONATE to expand our legislative reach and impact  Customize your contribution with a one-time payment, or a recurring monthly contribution of your choice.

The state legislature keeps pushing monstrosities like SB1150 & HB615 , the so-called "Health Care Access Protection Act" that doubles down on last year's page-bloated nightmare and essentially legalizes interstate kidnapping under the banner of "gender-affirming care. However, a powerful countermeasure has been sitting in the wings: HB264 . This bill slams the door shut on the very ideological weapon the kidnapping bills  rely on. Introduced back in January 2025 and carried over into the 2026 session, HB264 is short, sharp, and laser-focused. It amends Hawaii Revised Statutes on what counts as the "best interest of the child" in custody and visitation fights. The key language: "In determining what constitutes the best interest of the child under this section, the court shall not consider whether a parent affirms their child's gender identity or expression that does not align with the sex assigned at birth." This prohibits courts from playing gender ideology referee and keeps judges from deciding that a parent who supports social transition, preferred pronouns, or medical steps is automatically the "better" caregiver. Importantly, this means no more penalizing the parents under the guise of “care”. From Section 1:  “The legislature finds that parents have a constitutionally protected right to direct the care, custody, and control of their children, including children experiencing gender dysphoria.”   The effect would be to strip out this subjective and politically charged factor from the custody equation entirely. Keep the real best-interest factors intact (abuse history, family violence, parent-child bond, caregiving consistency) and don't let activist judges or one-sided "experts" sneak in gender affirmation as the golden ticket. HB264: Protect Parental Rights Remember that damning line from page 52 of SB1150? Hawaii courts  " shall not consider as a factor weighing against the petitioner any taking of the child ... if there is evidence that the taking or retention of the child was for the purposes of obtaining gender-affirming health care services". (emphasis added) In plain English: as long as the abductor claims  the runaway was about getting puberty blockers or hormones in our "sanctuary" state, Hawaii judges are forbidden  from holding that abduction against them in custody rulings. Loving parents in restrictive states suddenly become "unfit" because they won't sign off on often irreversible medical interventions. State agencies get empowered to rip kids away based on "controversial and subjective criteria." Chaos ensues. Jurisdictional quagmire. This is why we’ve dubbed it the “Kidnapping Bill”. It would leave families torn apart and with little to no recourse. It would prioritize gender ideology over parental rights. HB264 obliterates that playbook. By banning any consideration of gender affirmation (or non-affirmation) in Hawaii custody decisions, it yanks the rug out from under the kidnapping loophole. Even if a parent flees to Hawaii with a child to access "care" shielded by SB1150/HB615, they can't then waltz into family court and say, "I'm the affirming parent, so give me custody!" The court is prohibited  from weighing that affirmation. Likewise, the original parent can't be branded unfit for refusing to affirm. It upholds neutrality and protects parental rights . No more state-sponsored favoritism toward one side of a deeply divisive medical and ideological debate. HB264 doesn't ban gender-affirming care. It doesn't criminalize anything. It simply says: keep politics and subjective gender theories OUT of the courtroom when deciding who raises Hawaii's children. That's the kind of limited, freedom-preserving legislation libertarians and parents across the spectrum can rally behind. Time to support the bill that defends families instead of dismantling them. Take Action: Take action by following the steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text: SUPPORT: HB264 . OPPOSE: SB1150  & HB615 Track & Testify : Our simple instructions make it easy! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii! Contact Us  if you need help, would like to volunteer, or want to stay updated. And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you . Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect Hawaii's liberty. DONATE to expand our legislative reach and impact  Customize your contribution with a one-time payment, or a recurring monthly contribution of your choice.

SB277 & HB384  would strengthen safeguards for minors against sexual exploitation, and it would do so without inflating government bloat or infringing on consensual adult behaviors. We're throwing our support behind it, you should too. It defends the most vulnerable from aggression. SB277 pauses the clock on the statute of limitations for certain felony sexual assaults and prostitution-related crimes during the time a victim is under 18. This gives survivors the space they often need to come forward as adults. The bill also lengthens probation periods for these convictions. It upgrades "promoting minor-produced sexual images" to a felony when the promoter is at least three years older than the child (keeping peer situations the same), and adds these felony offenses to the sex offender registry under Tier 1, which means registrants can petition for removal after a decade without another conviction. Victims of childhood exploitation frequently face delayed justice due to fear or trauma, and this bill empowers them without touching the freedoms of those who haven't harmed others. By deterring repeat offenders through longer probation and accountable registration, the measure reduces the call for more invasive surveillance down the line. The government stays focused on its proper role: shielding citizens from fraud and force. By cracking down on minor-involved prostitution and similar abuses, it helps eliminate coercive distortions. Penalties are limited to proven aggressors who violate children's rights, avoiding the trap of punishing victimless acts. This proposed legislation punishes clear violations of minors' rights while creating a stable framework for justice that balances deterrence with rehabilitation. This bill protects our keiki without eroding the liberties we hold dear. Help Us Support This Measure: Take action by following the steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text:   Senate Bill 277/HB384 Testify on the Measures. Maps of districts and representative contact information can be found here.   You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii!  Contact us today to get tailored advice, collaboration, and support.   And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you. Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect our liberty. Keep the Momentum Going Your contributions help us track bills, craft testimony, and mobilize supporters. Consider a one-time gift or monthly support  to expand our reach and help us defend liberty session after session.

Senate Bill 433 is the Aloha State's latest swing at restricting your right to carry anything sharper than a butter knife or heavier than a pineapple. This gem prohibits open and  concealed carry of dirks, daggers, blackjacks, metal knuckles, bladed weapons, batons, cudgels, truncheons, police batons, collapsible batons, billy clubs, or nightsticks. A simple misdemeanor for toting one around, or a class C felony if in tandum with another “violation”. Nothing says "public safety" like turning a pocket knife into a felony enhancer. Sweeping Carry Ban = A Direct Jab at the Second Amendment The bill amends Hawaii Revised Statutes §134-51 to prohibit anyone (not authorized by law) from knowingly carrying (openly on the person, concealed on the person, or  concealed in a bag/container) any " dirk, dagger, blackjack, metal knuckles, bladed weapon, or other deadly or dangerous weapon. " It classifies these as misdemeanors.  Provided: "that this subsection shall not apply to a billy."  (“Billy" is defined as including cudgel, truncheon, police baton, collapsible baton, billy club, or nightstick.) So, those club-like items aren't banned outright under the carry rules... unless you're caught with them during another crime, which bumps it to a class C felony under subsection (b). The Second Amendment 's "right of the people to keep and bear Arms"  isn't gun-exclusive. As Heller  (2008)  clarified, it “guarantee(s) an individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation." . Bruen  (2022) asserts “The right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense is deeply rooted in history, and no other constitutional right requires a showing of ‘special need’ to exercise it.”   Blanket bans on carrying common self-defense tools also carry no such tradition.  "Bladed Weapon" & Bags | Sharpening the Silliness Hawaii's fix? Slap "bladed weapon"  into the list, broadening it absurdly. Your steak knife in a picnic bag could qualify. Yes, the bill explicitly adds "bladed weapon"  to the prohibited list, and extends the ban to concealed carry in "a bag or other container carried by the person."  There is no clear definition for "bladed weapon in the proposed bill or correlating statute, meaning it would encompass utility knives, multitools, or even sheathed blades in backpacks. Founders carried bladed arms (think swords) freely for protection. There were no broad 18th-century bans on toting them in satchels or sheathes on thie person. If Caetano v. Massachusetts  (2016)  clearly defined the Second Amendment protections to to include stun guns, knives and clubs are logically already covered. Instead, SB 433 treats non-gun arms like ticking time bombs. Compounding Penalties SB433 would make it a misdemeanor for these basic carry “violations”, but if you're possessing/using/threatening with these weapons (including billy now) "while engaged in the commission of a separate felony or misdemeanor"  it would be considered a Class C felony, stacked on top (concurrent or consecutive). This enhances any  other crime, holding the potential of a traffic stop with a blackjack to turn into felony territory. Our Founders fought against arbitrary escalations such as British arms seizures without cause. You can carry a blunt stick around without misdemeanor risk... until you jaywalk with it.  "Affirmative Defense" = Guilty Until You Prove You're a Good Guy with a Good Weapon Here's the bill's "generous" twist: Defenses galore, but affirmative  ones, meaning you  prove them after arrest. This flips Due Process (Fifth/Fourteenth Amendments) by removing presumption of innocence.  Subsection (g): Gives you “permission” in your own home.  (h): For open carry, if the weapon "is currently in common use in this country for lawful self-defense purposes" —but not in " sensitive locations " (per §134-9.1, gun-style bans) or if displaying it "causes alarm."   (i): For bag/vehicle carry, if locked in a hard-sided container for transport. The bill nods to Bruen 's common use test for guns, but applies it as a defense  you must affirm in court, not a presumption. Was it in your possession or used for self-defense? Okay then, you’ll have to prove it's "lawful"  after the cuffs click. Compare this to the Second Amendment's proactive right to bear arms for security instead of retroactive courtroom haggling. This so-called "defense" is a dud, mocking liberty by making you beg for it post-arrest.  Post-Wolford v. Lopez: Hawaii's Stubborn Surf on Slippery Sands. Wolford v. Lopez  (9th Cir. 2024)  is torching Hawaii's post- Bruen  gun bans in "sensitive places"  like parks and bars and their default private-property ban. SB 433 imports those same "sensitive location"  limits into non-gun bans via the affirmative defense. Plus, Section 4 mandates constitutional construction. Not a smart play, since the bill's setup invites lawsuits mirroring the inevitable Wolford  fallout. Oppose SB433. It is a snub to the parchment that protects us all. The state’s police force is already, by their own admissions, overrun with work and lacking in staff. Should we really add stick-chaser to their list of duties? Oppose SB433 : Take action by following the steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text: Senate Bill 433  Track & Testify : Our simple instructions make it easy! Maps of districts and representative contact information can be found here.   Join Our Team! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii!  Contact us today to get tailored advice, collaboration, and support.   And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you. Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect Hawaii's liberty.

. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting DATE: Monday, January 19, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST Call to Order: 7:05 pm Roll Call: Voting: Austin Martin, Nicholas Zehr, Abbra Green, Bryce Thon, Participating: Celina Monge, Aaron Toman Minutes and revisions from December 08, 2025: Unanimous Approval Agenda: Unanimous Approval Unfinished Business: Discussion 12/8 - Suggestion from Austin Martin to change Article III, Section 1 wording to “shall be only open” . No motion made Discussion 12/8 - Austin Martin suggested adding at the end of Article III, Section 3, 2a: “The official sustaining dues amount shall be posted prominently on the website.” No motion made. Discussion was opened 12/8 on Section III, 2d, Auxiliary Members: Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Nicholas Zehr to strike all language regarding auxiliary members. Unanimous Approval. New Business: Floor open to motions and discussions beginning with Article III & IV: Motion by Nicholas Zehr, to amend the following subsections of Article III, Section 3: Subsection 1: “The Party shall not discriminate based on characteristics protected by applicable law or immutable personal characteristics, and shall not be required to recognize ideological, political, or associational beliefs as protected classes.” Subsection 2: “ The Party may take defensive measures against organized entities or coordinated efforts that demonstrably advocate or engage in the initiation of force, fraud, or coercion, or that seek to undermine the Party’s autonomy through deceptive or hostile means, consistent with the NAP.” Subsection 4: “Upon a finding, by a majority of the Executive Committee, that a member has a substantial and material conflict of interest or has knowingly concealed required disclosures, the Committee may take corrective action pursuant to Article VII.” And to add a new Subsection 6: “No adverse action under this Section shall be taken without notice, an opportunity to respond, and a recorded vote.” second by Abbra Green, unanimous approval. Adjournment: 7:45 pm The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting is Monday, February 02, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. Help Fund Our Special Convention The Libertarian Party of Hawaii will be hosting a Special Convention at the end of August 2026 specifically for the purpose of passing new bylaws. Help us fund our efforts with a one-time or monthly contribution:

On January 24, 2026 at the House of Glory Church in Hilo, Hawaii, The Libertarian Party of Hawaii hosted a Campaign Readiness Seminar presented by Aaron Toman . This prompted great questions and extensive discussions from participants interested in running for office and participating on our campaign teams. A big mahalo to Aaron Toman for the presentation and to House of Glory for the comfortable venue! This event was livestreamed over Zoom and uploaded to our YouTube Channel . You can also download Toman's slideshow in PDF form: Candidate Filing for the 2026 Elections begins February 2, 2026 and ends June 2, 2026. Fill out our volunteer sign-up sheet  if you’re interested in running for office or want to be on a Candidate Team. Support Liberty This Election Season Your donations help fuel our election season. Any amount helps. Consider becoming a monthly supporter at $10, $25, $50, or $100—whatever fits your budget. Recurring gifts compound into real growth for the movement. Monthly donations provide reliable funding to hire staff, scale our bill list, and maintain consistent pressure on liberty issues all session long. Your support scales our impact—more candidates, stronger principled advocacy, and real progress for individual rights and limited government. Donate now (one-time or monthly) . Alternatively you can send a check by Printing and mailing our PDF form to : Libertarian Party of Hawaii PO Box 4444 Honolulu, HI 96802

SUPPORT HB540; Oppose SB488, Sb2073, SB727, & SB682. In the 2026 legislative session, Hawaii lawmakers are pushing a slate of bills that could force toxic fluoride into our public water systems under the false pretense of "public health." They’re proposals are aimed at mass-medicating the population with a known neurotoxin and endocrine disruptor. This poison would affect our vulnerable residents the most, especially children, the elderly, and those with health conditions. The state's desire to "improve" our water ignores decades of evidence showing fluoride's dangers, prioritizing outdated dental dogma over real safety.  Poison Proposals for State-Sponsored Harm Four bills— SB488 , SB2073 , SB727 , and SB682 —represent a concerted effort to lace Hawaii's drinking water with fluoride, a chemical the state pretends is harmless despite mounting evidence to the contrary. These measures vary in scope but share a common thread: they empower or mandate the addition of this toxin without adequate safeguards, exemptions for at-risk groups, or easy ways to stop it once started. By design, they could expose millions to elevated fluoride levels, risking everything from lowered IQ in kids to disrupted thyroid function in adults. Here's a rundown of each, with their most problematic elements called out. SB488 : The Blanket Mandate Menace  Forces every non-federal supplier to adjust fluoride to HHS "optimal" levels, with DOH-set testing intervals and provided training—but zero funding, sunset, or resident opt-outs. Most problematic:  Sweeping scope ignores consent and health risks, dosing everyone with a systemic toxin (including formula-fed infants and kidney-impaired residents who can't excrete fluoride properly). SB2073 : The Large-System Poison Push  Targets all suppliers with 1,000+ connections, mandating HHS-level fluoridation plus monitoring, sampling/reporting to DOH; DOH offers training/assistance and annual legislative reports on statewide fluoride levels. Exempts federal systems. Most problematic:  Oversight normalizes chronic exposure essentially monitoring a statewide poisoning operation. SB727 : The Conditional Trap with a False Exit  Requires 1,000+ connection suppliers to fluoridate per county HHS-based standards. DOH provides training, tech support, reimbursements, and annual reports. Supersedes contrary laws but "sunsets" only if every resident obtains or affirmatively rejects dental insurance at an unobtainable 100% tracking threshold. DOH tracks/reports dental coverage annually. Most problematic:  Locks in indefinite fluoridation while tying toxin exposure to unrelated coverage gaps. Punishes the uninsured. SB682 : The Backdoor Enabler  Bans state/county mandates for non-contamination health additives (like fluoride) but opens a loophole: If federal Safe Drinking Water Act allows mass medication, it adds "safeguards". Most problematic:  Anti-mandate language leaves fluoride vulnerable to federal override. It’s a Trojan horse normalizing water as a drug delivery system. These bills all mandate or enable a chemical assault on our bodies without true accountability. Hawaii already has low fluoridation rates for good reason. Residents know better than to trust bureaucrats with their health. Support: HB540 The Ban on Fluoride Poisoning On the bright side, HB540  stands as a courageous defense. This measure amends Hawaii Revised Statutes to add that, "No person or supplier of water shall introduce fluoride to a public water system." This is an outright statewide ban on adding fluoride, applying to all non-federal operators. Importantly, it preempts and voids any conflicting laws, executive orders, ordinances, regulations, or rules, nullifying sneaky attempts to fluoridate locally and statewide. It directly confronts the dangers of fluoride, drawing on solid research that exposes this as a chemical hazardous to human health. It's a presumed neurodevelopmental toxin, especially harmful to children and vulnerable groups. The bill's preamble states that fluoride isn't the benign “cavity-fighter” it's sold as: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' National Toxicology Program (NTP) classifies fluoride as a presumed hazard. The National Research Council (NRC) has flagged fluoride as an endocrine disruptor that lowers thyroid function, particularly in women. Fluoride exposure is also tied to sleep disturbances, including higher odds of sleep apnea symptoms in adolescents. In teens, fluoride impairs kidney and liver function. In children, fluoride is associated with lower IQ, ADHD-like behaviors, and cognitive deficits in children. Infants that are formula-fed in fluoridated areas can exceed safe intake levels by up to 59%.  Even the CDC admits fluoride's primary benefit is topical (on the teeth's surface), not systemic (ingested). HB540 is a lifeline against the state's fluoride fixation. By banning additions and overriding conflicts, it protects us from a poisoning of the masses. Hawaii's lawmakers are gambling our health in favor of state overreach. The opposed bills reek of corporate influence and outdated science, while HB540 offers evidence-based reasoning and thorough protections.  Take Action to Stop the Insidious Plans to Poison Hawaii Water | Fluoride Mandates Familiarize yourself with the proposed texts: Oppose   SB488 , SB2073 , SB727 , and SB682 . Support   HB540 . Follow these simple instructions  to make your voice heard. Join Our Team! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voi ces of Hawaii!  Contact us today to get tailored advice, collaboration, and support.   And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you. Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect our liberty. Support LPHI Legislative Activism Your donations fuel bill tracking, testimony preparation, and advocacy to defend liberty at the Capitol. Giving levels that help us grow: $10 supports detailed research and analysis on the next bill. $25 enables testimony drafting and submissions. $50 can cover up to a week of bill activitiies. $100 funds broader monitoring, response, recruitment, and targeted advertising. $300+ allows us to hire part-time support, run effective outreach campaigns, and significantly expand the number of bills we cover and defend. Make it recurring for maximum impact: Consider becoming a monthly supporter at $10, $25, $50, or $100—whatever fits your budget. Recurring gifts compound into real growth for the movement. Monthly donations provide reliable funding to hire staff, scale our bill list, and maintain consistent pressure on liberty issues all session long. Your support scales our impact—more legislation tracked, stronger principled advocacy, and real progress for individual rights and limited government. Donate now (one-time or monthly)  or Print and mail our PDF form to  Libertarian Party of Hawaii PO Box 4444 Honolulu, HI 96802

The Libertarian Party of Hawaii is proud to throw our full support behind House Bill 312 (HB312), a commonsense measure that strengthens due process and protects families from unwarranted government intrusion. This bill is a vital step toward ensuring that parents are informed of their rights during child welfare investigations. HB312, titled "Relating to the Department of Human Services ," requires the Department of Human Services (DHS) to provide written notice to a parent about their rights whenever the agency is investigating a child who is or may be subject to imminent harm. This bill embodies our core principles like limited government, individual sovereignty, and the presumption of innocence. Parents have a fundamental right to raise their children without arbitrary interference from the state. Too often, child protective services investigations can escalate into traumatic experiences for families, sometimes leading to unnecessary separations or violations of privacy. Without clear, written notification of rights—such as the right to legal counsel, the right to remain silent, or the right to challenge allegations—these processes can feel like a one-sided power grab by bureaucrats. HB312 ensures transparency and accountability, empowering parents to make informed decisions and defend their families effectively. HB312 would notify all parents, upon initial contact by DHS, to be notified:  A. “The parent is not required to permit the department or a police officer to enter the residence of the parent; B. The parent must be given the allegations prior to an interview; C. The parent is not required to speak with the department at that time; D.The parent has the right to record the interview;  E. The parent is entitled to seek representation of an attorney and have an attorney present when the parent is questioned by the department; F. Any statement made by the parent or any family member may be used against the parent in a hearing initiated pursuant to this chapter;  G. Neither the department nor the police officer is an attorney, and neither may provide legal advice to the parent; H. The parent is not required to sign any document presented by the department or a police officer, including but not limited to a release of claims or service agreement, and is entitled to have an attorney review any document before the parent agrees to sign; and I. A failure of the parent to communicate with the department or a police officer may have serious consequences, which may include the filing of a petition under this chapter and the assumption of temporary foster custody of the child by the department; therefore, it is in the parent’s best interest to speak with the department or immediately seek the advice of a qualified attorney;” It would also require that interviews conducted without parents present be recorded and documented. We are in full support of the intent of this bill, with the recommendation that section I be reworded to exclude lthe language of " it is in the best interest", and "may result in assumption of temporary foster custody" to avoid giving legal advice, contradicting constitutional rights, or convoluting the matter with section C. While these are rights parents have , not everyone understands this, especially in stressful or seemingly unpredictable situations. Libertarians believe that the government should only intervene when absolutely necessary with strict adherence to due process. By mandating written notices upon initial contact, HB312 reduces the risk of abuse in the system, prevents coercive tactics, and upholds the non-aggression principle. No one, especially not the state, should initiate force, fraud, or coercion against peaceful individuals and families. Libertarians always uphold parental rights. We commend the sponsors for championing this bill and urge all legislators to advance it through committee and to a floor vote.  Help Us Uphold Parental Rights: Take action by following the steps: Click on the hyperlink to familiarize yourself with the bill text: HB312 Speak out against these movements.  Maps of districts and representative contact information can be found here.   Join Our Team! You don't have to do this alone. We are here to help your actions succeed and amplify the voices of Hawaii!  Contact us today to get tailored advice, collaboration, and support.   And don't forget to let us know what issues matter most to you. Keep an eye out as we continue to publish on topics that affect our liberty.

Join us for our Campaign Readiness Seminar, hosted by our 2024 Libertarian Hawaii Congressional candidate, Aaron Toman. Whether you're interested in running for office, or you want to support someone else's run, this course is designed to empower you with the information and resources to run a campaign efficiently and effectively. Learn from someone who has first-hand experience running for office. Aaron Toman will be walking you through the steps to file for candidacy while sharing his hard-earned lessons along the way. He will share his successes and failures running for office; you'll learn what worked and what didn't and how it applies to you. After his slideshow presentation, he will open the floor to a live Q&A to make sure you enter the race with confidence. If you cannot attend in person, we still want you to be able to attend and participate over Zoom. We will facilitate virtual conversations as needed. Simply email our secretary with your name and express interest. This is a valuable experience you will not want to miss! 2026 Campaign Readiness Seminar by Aaron Toman DATE:  Saturday, January 24, 2026 TIME: 1-3 pm HST LOCATION: House of Glory Church 109 Haili St, Hilo, HI 96720.

In a series of emails, Hawaii Chairman Austin Martin, a representative from Region 1 of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), detailed allegations of election irregularities, judicial misconduct, and vulnerabilities in voting systems. Martin's communications, part of a broader discussion among LNC members on election fraud, highlight concerns that extend to national implications.  Ballot Disparities and Potential Outcome Changes Martin cited a specific case in Hawaii County, where a Permitted Interaction Group revealed a discrepancy of 19,000 ballots , a number that could have influenced multiple races. " In my own county, Hawaii County, the known 19,000 ballot disparity could have changed the outcome of most of the races on the ballot ," he wrote. He argued that such issues are widespread, affecting local elections more severely than presidential ones, and challenged claims that outcome-altering fraud has not been proven. Martin described this as a "non-factual political claim"  often used first by those benefiting from irregularities. Click the image to read the source Vulnerabilities in Electronic Voting Systems Emphasizing objective facts over political bias, Martin highlighted the nefarious history of voting machines and software vulnerabilities. He noted that without physically auditable paper trails, results cannot be authenticated. As an example, he referenced vendors like Smartmatic, who are facing litigation for misconduct , including bribery and corruption in other countries. "Vendors like Smartmatic (purportedly controlled by socialist Venezuela) are facing litigation and charges over election related misconduct in other countries—including bribery, and corruption,"  Martin stated. He added that these systems or their products are likely to be used in upcoming U.S. elections. Martin also referenced broader issues with election technology vendors such as Dominion Voting Systems, Election Systems & Software (ES&S), and Hart InterCivic. " The 2021–2024 Halderman/Curling expert reports  in Georgia documented that Dominion BMD and ICC systems can be fully compromised in minutes with only brief physical access and no trace left in logs,"  he explained. He pointed to forensic examinations in counties across the country, which revealed unauthorized software, deleted logs, and concealed issues. Case of Tina Peters and Whistleblower Retaliation A significant portion of the LNC’s discussions focused on Tina Peters, the former Mesa County Clerk in Colorado, whom Martin rightly portrayed as a victim of retaliation for exposing vulnerabilities. He urged caution in accepting official narratives that label whistleblowers as criminals. "Blaming whistleblowers and prosecuting victims are common tactics in government corruption scandals, " Martin wrote. He noted that Peters remains in solitary confinement despite a pardon from President Donald Trump and an admission from Colorado Governor Jared Polis that her sentence was too "harsh." Peters is a whistleblower who preserved election data from Dominion systems in 2021 to prevent erasure during a software update. Experts confirmed signs of manipulation in the data, but Peters faced charges and a biased trial where evidence was suppressed. She was convicted on seven counts and sentenced to nine years. Trump's December 11, 2025, pardon, called her a "brave and innocent Patriot,"  though she remains imprisoned as of January 11, 2026. Her case is one of political persecution, especially compared to unpunished actions by officials like Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold. Judicial and Procedural Irregularities Martin alleged widespread judicial fraud, drawing from his own lawsuits against Hawaii's Chief Elections Officer Scott Nago ( Martin v. Nago  and Martin v. Watson ). He said cases are dismissed on doctrines like qualified and judicial immunity rather than merits. "My cases, like many others, were resolved on the doctrines of Qualified and Judicial Immunity, not a procedural or factual defect on my own part,"  he said. In Hawaii's 2022 election cycle, Hawaii State officials illegally swore in the governor before certification, amid pending challenges. Original certification documents and oaths were "lost or destroyed". The courts have overlooked these violations by granting immunity and targeting whistleblowers like Martin. As an official election observer in 2022, Martin attempted to file an incident report on vulnerabilities but was removed without explanation. He stated he was later characterized as a "disruptive criminal. " He compared this with similar retaliation patterns in the Peters’ case. You can watch Chairman Martin confront Scott Nago on his decision in his follow-up: Voter Rolls and Verification Issues Martin raised concerns about unverifiable voter rolls, particularly in Hawaii, where state records are withheld, leading to disparities with county data. He referenced a complaint he escalated to the U.S. Department of Justice in February, which resulted in a lawsuit against Nago and Hawaii over the issue . "We have no way of even verifying most states' voter rolls,"  he wrote, emphasizing the need for state records in fraud detection and claims under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Broader Implications: Libertarian National Committee Debates Election Integrity Martin criticized dismissing cases on procedural grounds as potential cover-ups and expressed hesitation toward narratives intertwined with conspiracy theories, but insisted facts from eyewitnesses like himself demand action. Chairman Martin sees these issues as existential for the Libertarian Party (LP), arguing that ignoring election fraud and judicial racketeering would undermine the party's credibility. "Is there any other issue the LP should care about more than election fraud & judicial racketeering?" he asked.  “By taking a principled stand here, we are going to affect the overall political dynamic around this issue profoundly. We can accomplish something meaningful just by raising awareness and making our position known on this matter — it's low-hanging fruit. Low effort, high impact.” The discussion elicited responses from other LNC members, including Keith Thompson (Region 3 Rep), who agreed on electronic vulnerabilities but disagreed on evidence of outcome-changing fraud. He sees Peters' case as an unlawful breach rather than proof of fraud. “I'm hesitant to go full-on into "voting machine fraud" territory because it's far too often intermixed with baseless conspiracy theories.” This internal debate showcases ongoing tensions within the LP over election integrity, with Martin's detailed accounts drawing from personal experiences and national examples. The party has not yet issued an official statement on the matter.

The Hawaii Elections Commission meetings have recently addressed several matters related to the 2024 General Election and ongoing election administration. Topics included the Permitted Interaction Group (PIG) report on Hawaii County ballot discrepancies, chain-of-custody procedures, tracking logs from BallotTrax and Hart InterCivic, USPS mail verification, the ERIC voter information-sharing system, voter registration verification processes, Help America Vote Act (HAVA) compliance, accuracy issues with meeting minutes, Sunshine Law appeals, audit requests, and extensive calls for leadership accountability. Chair Michael Curtis: Partisan Control Instead of Neutral Leadership Curtis repeatedly shut down testimony about the 19,000+ ballot discrepancy identified in Commissioner Osterkamp’s PIG report on Hawaii County, labeling it “fallacious” and “rage-bait” even though it was in Osterkamp’s Permitted Interraction Group (PIG) Report and agendized. This directly contravenes the Sunshine Law (HRS §92-1 ). He repeatedly cuts off certain testifiers mid-sentence as “off-topic”. He claimed in January that selective silencing is his absolute prerogative as chair, and misattributed motions to factionalize debate. These are also blatent violations of Robert’s Rules of Order which requires chair neutrality. He also blocked a motion to remove Nago by invoking vague sunshine law concerns, delaying it until the following meeting on January 7th. When the January 7th convened, it was nowhere to be found on the agenda anyway. The motion was finally heard after Nago’s report, but it did not pass, despite overwhelming public outcry against his opaque and back-to-back failures. Chief Election Officer Scott Nago: Basic Incompetence in Core Duties Nago’s reports avoid addressing PIG findings, voter data reconciliation, and litigation. He admitted the ERIC interstate voter-sharing system has unknown error rates and is withheld from the Department of Justice as “private”, even from government officials. He wrongly described the definition of chain of custody as the physical envelopes being placed in a box and sealed for 22 months, and the definition of inventory as how many SVRS entries there are. This reveals that the Chief Elections Officer holds a fundamental misunderstanding of his legal requirements and the basic mechanisms of his professional field. Nago also confirmed Hawaii County has no physical transfer logs or verification, yet he still only offers electronic solutions in the future. Translation: “Trust us brah” . He, like Chair Curtis, dismissed USPS data showing 19,000 excess ballots as irrelevant. He also outright admitted that voter registration relies almost entirely on self-attestation with minimal checks. The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit   against Scott Nago in his official capacity for denying access to the full statewide voter registration list in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, NVRA, and HAVA. Multiple commission motions demanding compliance (including chain-of-custody records) and even for his removal failed, despite massive public support. Conflicts of Interest & Systemic Dysfunction Commissioner Osterkamp was in opposition to allowing media and news outlets at audits, claiming it would fuel “conspiracy theories.” The State Auditor rejected the Commission’s request for an audit it, forcing another delay for county-level requests. The Attorney General’s office invoked attorney-client privilege to close discussion of lawsuits against Nago and Curtis. The AG simultaneously represents both the accused and the commissioners on OIP requests, an open and direct conflict of interest. He also sought to personally manage all OIP complaints against the Commission, including those filed by Commissioner Cushnie. Sunshine law appeals revealed repeated testimony denials, minute omissions, and AG dismissals of obvious violations, despite the law’s explicit mandates for transparency. Confusion persisted, with one commissioner even asked aloud, “What and where are the commission rules?”, a shocking admission of ignorance from someone who has served on the board for months. New Commissioner Dalton improperly voted to approve prior minutes she never attended. Hand-count motions for 2024 envelopes passed narrowly amid opposition. Testimony consistently demands Nago’s and Curtis’s removal, yet they remain month after month. The commission unanimously refused to forward findings to the Governor due to the commissioner’s shared institutional mistrust. Despite being framed as “partisan rage-bait” by the accused, this is not a left-right issue. Voices from Democrats, Republicans, independents, and Libertarians express the same alarm. Coverage in Civil Beat and Aloha State Daily documents resignations, repeated audit calls, and growing division over mail-in voting. 100+ testifiers routinely sit through 7 hour long meetings in the middle of the workweek to demand change.  The DoJ Lawsuit On December 22, 2025, the Libertarian Party of Hawaii unanimously passed a “Resolution in Support of the U.S. Department of Justice Lawsuit Against the Hawaii Office of Elections and Chief Elections Officer Scott Nago” . Our resolution endorses the DOJ action, demands full compliance with federal election laws, supports continued federal oversight of Hawaii’s noncompliance, and affirms that transparency and accountability strengthen—not threaten—election integrity. Full text available in our December 2025 Membership Newsletter. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii calls for: Full support for the U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit seeking to enforce federal election law requirements against the Hawaiʻi Office of Elections and Chief Elections Officer Scott Nago. Full compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act, including the prompt and transparent disclosure of voter registration records as required by law. Continued exercise of federal jurisdiction by authorities to address systemic noncompliance with election transparency and record-access requirements in the State of Hawaiʻi. Affirmation that election integrity is strengthened by lawful oversight, public accountability, and adherence to constitutional and statutory obligations. Your Call to Action Contact your state legislators today. Attend and testify at Elections Commission meetings to apply direct public pressure. Meetings are held at the Office of Elections (802 Lehua Avenue, Pearl City) or virtually (details on each agenda). Testimony is generally limited to 2-3 minutes on agenda items and can be given remotely or in person. All agendas, minutes, notices, and archives are posted here: https://elections.hawaii.gov/about-us/boards-and-commissions/elections-commission/  Sign up for email notifications on that page so you receive agendas and regular meeting notices automatically.