Since we published "Free Speech Groundhog Day," the situation has escalated, drawing national attention. On July 8, 2026, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) took up Martin’s case. FIRE is the country's leading campus free speech watchdog. They wrote to Hawaiʻi Community College administrators and called on them to rescind the trespass warning against Libertarian Party of Hawaii and Young Americans for Liberty Chairman Austin Martin immediately. Petitioning Over the spring of 2026, Martin visited the Hilo campus to gather signatures for a petition asking the University of Hawaiʻi system to let students carry pepper spray for self-defense. Campus security removed him three separate times across March and April, then handed him a one-year trespass warning. They then doubled down by sending an email to all students telling them to keep an eye out for Martin and report any sightings of him on campuses. FIRE describes it as resting on an “erroneous and unconstitutional reading of the university system's solicitation policy”. The same conclusion we reached is now being stated by the nation's foremost authority on campus speech. The campus involved is Hawaiʻi Community College, which shares their location with UH Hilo, both under the UH system. The trespass warning came from that college's security. The underlying policy is systemwide, which is exactly why this keeps happening at more than one campus. UH System Policy Rewrite This all unfolded while the UH system was in the middle of rewriting its speech rules. In November 2025, UH President Wendy Hensel announced a plan to update the system's Time, Place, and Manner policy, and the drafts have been circulating for months. You can read the university's resource page and the draft Administrative Procedure. It is clear Martin was not violating the rules that were in force when he was banned, and he would not be violating the new rules (though not yet in effect) either. The rules in force at the time already protected him. EP 10.206, adopted after the university lost the 2014 Burch case, requires campuses to let students approach others and hand out non-commercial literature "such as petitions" in all areas generally open to students. A one-man petition drive for self-defense rights sits neatly inside this protection. The new draft protects him too. The proposal carries the exact same language forward, and still directs campuses to implement the solicitation rule "in a manner to permit students to approach others on campus and to distribute non-commercial literature such as petitions, circulars, leaflets, newspapers in all areas generally available to students." The problem is administrators enforcing a policy that does not exist, against speech that is protected by both the First Amendment and by UH policies. UH lost this fight in 2014. As a result, they wrote a policy promising to protect speech. They are now drafting a new policy that promises the same thing. In the middle of that process, its own security banned a citizen for a year for doing something both versions protect. New rules will not fix a culture that ignores the rules already on the books. FIRE Speech Code Rating It's worth understanding how FIRE already views this system. FIRE gives the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (the system's flagship) a "yellow light" speech code rating. FIRE describes the yellow light school tier as one that maintains at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application. The rating is effectively a warning label. It means the written rules are vague enough that an administrator can bend them against speech they do not like, as seen with Austin Martin in Hilo. UH once held FIRE's red light (the worst rating possible), and only climbed to yellow after being sued in the 2014 Young Americans for Liberty case out of UH Hilo, where students were blocked from handing out copies of the U.S. Constitution because they stood outside a designated "free speech zone." When the university settled and killed the zones systemwide, they earned a yellow grade. More than a decade later the same system is still running on ambiguous language as they run petitioners off campuses. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii is grateful FIRE has once again stepped in to protect First Amendment rights in Hawaii. We will keep following this case. Have your rights been violated by the State of Hawaii? We want to hear about it. Contact us anytime.

Hawaii votes by mail, so once you register to vote your ballot comes straight to your mailbox. Key dates for 2026: Primary: Saturday, August 8, 2026. Paper deadline is July 29 (paper deadline) General: Tuesday, November 3, 2026. Paper deadline is October 26 Missed the deadline? You can still register and vote in person at any Voter Service Center, through Election Day. Register to Vote Online (fastest): olvr.hawaii.gov. You'll need a Hawaii Driver License or State ID and your Social Security Number. No Hawaii ID? Grab a paper application at vote.gov/register/hawaii and send it to your County Elections Division. Already registered? Just make sure your address is current at olvr.hawaii.gov and you can track your ballot anytime through Hawaii BallotTrax. Ballots must be received by 7:00 p.m. on Election Day (received, not postmarked), so mail early or use a drop box. Full details, drop-box locations, and county contacts are at elections.hawaii.gov. Support Libertarian Candidates Meet the Libertarians running for a freer Hawaii.

On July 5, 2026, the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) passed the Resolution on the Warrantless Dragnet Surveillance of Personal Electronic Devices. It condemns the growing web of tracking tools that police departments now use to monitor and track ordinary people. It also calls for a warrant based on individualized probable cause before any agency collects location data. The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi backs this resolution against dragnet surveillance, as it applies directly to what is already happening on our own streets. Our own past torch bearers warned against these very same overreaches. HPD Has Been Doing This Since 2012 Honolulu Police started using automated license plate readers (ALPRs) in patrol cars back in 2012. By 2022, HPD had 21 ALPR units in operation, each one costing about $18,000, with total maintenance since 2013 running around $75,000. In late 2025, HPD used a federal grant to move beyond patrol cars and mount fixed cameras on street lights and light poles in Waikiki and downtown, and officers told KHON2 that the department wants cameras on every part of the island, with Kalihi and east Honolulu next in line. None of this requires a warrant. None of it requires suspicion tied to a specific person. A camera reads every plate that passes, whether the driver is a suspect, a commuter, or someone who is simply driving to church. Hawaii HB 2033 This year the state legislature moved on House Bill 2033, an eight-part transportation measure that would let the same camera network start flagging cars for expired registration and safety checks too. The bill would also let counties place new cameras at any intersection they define as "high risk." Camera enforcement tends to hit people from under-resourced communities the hardest, and Hawaii has no clear law governing how long this footage is kept, who can access it, or what it can be used for. Even the state Department of the Attorney General asked lawmakers to delay part of the bill so that rulemaking questions could be sorted out first, and Hawaiʻi County Police testified they do not have the staff to process the extra citations the system would generate. This expansion is moving faster than its guardrails. On Replay Hawaiʻi already has a cautionary tale on this exact subject. In the 1990s, the state ran a program nicknamed "Van Cam," a mass surveillance effort to ticket speeding drivers. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii played a major role in its shut down. “The city seems determined to make driving in Waikiki as unpleasant as possible. And let's not forget the van-cam fiasco. The Libertarian Party was the only one fighting that for years before it was actually initiated. If you drive and you're tired of being scolded and attacked, you need to ask those people seeking your vote this year where they stand on driving issues. Don't be shy. Otherwise, you leave your fate up to a handful of anti-driving activists.” -Tracy Ryan, Former Chair of LPHI ACLU of Hawaiʻi Executive Director Vanessa Chong referenced that history back when HPD first proposed ALPR technology, warning that dragnet surveillance of law-abiding drivers can become permanent while doing little to actually improve public safety. That warning from over a decade ago reads like it was written for HB 2033. The Supreme Court Gives Us New Ammunition Four days before the LNC passed its resolution, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Chatrie v. United States, a case about geofence warrants, where police ask a company like Google to hand over data on every phone that passed through an area during a set window of time. The sweep included every phone within a 17.5 acre circle around a Virginia bank for two hours, including phones inside a nearby church and private homes. In a 6-3 ruling written by Justice Kagan, the Court held that pulling this kind of location history from a third party counts as a search under the Fourth Amendment. A person keeps a an expectation of privacy in their own movements. The Court built on its 2018 ruling in Carpenter v. United States, which first extended Fourth Amendment protection to cell tower records. It applied that same logic to geofence data, which is even more precise. The ruling did stop short of declaring geofence warrants unconstitutional outright. That specific question got sent back down to the Fourth Circuit. But the core principle now stands at the Supreme Court level. The government cannot treat your location history as free for the taking just because a private company happens to hold it. A Win for Hawaii License plate readers and geofence warrants both rest on the same broken assumption, that a person gives up their privacy simply by existing in public or by using a phone. HPD's own stated goal, island-wide camera coverage, is a different flavor of exactly the kind of dragnet the Supreme Court just took a real step toward reining in in. If a warrant is required before police can ask Google where your phone has been, there is no principled reason a camera network should be allowed to log where your car has been without one. The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi will be watching HB 2033 and any successor bill closely in the 2027 legislative session. We encourage members to follow the example set by our trailblazers. Ask your state legislators and the running candidates this election cycle three questions: Who can access this data? How long is it kept? What happens when the system gets it wrong? The LNC Resolution Against Dragnet Surveillance was long overdue. Hawaiʻi shut down Van Cam once already. We should not need a repeat performance to learn the same lesson twice. Stand with us Every new member and monetary contribution moves the needle toward a freer Hawaii. Mahalo for your continued support!

At the July 5th, 2026 Libertarian National Committee (LNC) meeting, the Resolution on Tribal and National Sovereignty was unanimously adopted. The committee acknowledged the inherent sovereignty of Native American tribal nations and the Hawaiian Kingdom, and affirmed that their sovereignty predates and supersedes the jurisdictional frameworks imposed by the United States government. It made clear the Hawaiian Kingdom's claim outranks what was placed over it in 1893. Hawaiian Sovereignty “the Libertarian National Committee formally acknowledges the inherent sovereignty of Native American tribal nations and the Hawaiian Kingdom and affirms that their sovereignty predates and supersedes jurisdictional frameworks imposed by the United States government” Libertarian National Committee Meeting, July 05, 2026 For a party whose backbone is the non-aggression principle, that is the only honest position available. The overthrow was carried out with the help of foreign troops. Force does not create a legitimate title. The resolution grounds that claim in the federal government's own admission. Public Law 103-150, the 1993 “Apology Resolution”, is the official acknowledgement from Congress that the 1893 overthrow was illegal and that the Hawaiian Kingdom never relinquished its claims to sovereignty. The LNC resolution merely takes the United States at its own word. The Drafting Process This is a product of careful work. Region 9 Representative Alex Flores noticed the resolution and then revised it in the open, folding in suggestions from other members between the first draft on June 29th and the workshopped version the next day. The revision added the Treaty of 1852 with the Apache nations, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie (1998), drawing a single throughline. Treaty, corporate settlement, tribal recognition, every framework the federal government has tried has failed to deliver genuine self-determination to any of these underrepresented peoples. We are grateful to Representative Flores and to everyone who contributed to the language. We are not the only ones who recognize the principle here. The Arizona Libertarian Party platform already states that it recognizes the sovereignty of indigenous people and rejects interference in their affairs from every level of government. That conviction traveling from a single affiliate's platform into a unanimous national resolution is exactly how a party's principles are supposed to mature. This resolution upholds sovereignty, something libertarians across the country already hold. Mahalo from The Libertarian Party of Hawaii The resolution closes by asking Libertarians to explore how best to empower these nations to reclaim their independence. For most of the committee that is a principled aspiration, but for us it is home ground. We intend to take the charge seriously and to be a resource to the Party on the topic of Hawaiians specifically. The overthrow was illegal. The Kingdom never surrendered its sovereignty. Congress admitted it more than thirty years ago. The Libertarian National Committee has now said it too, in unanimous agreement. We are grateful for that, and we are ready to do the work that flows from it.

DATE: Monday, July 06, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST Call to Order of the Bylaws & Platform Committee meeting: 7:11 pm HST. Roll Call: Voting: Austin Martin, Abbra Green, Bryce Thon; Participating: Celina Monge, Sonja Feintech Minutes and revisions from June 29, 2026: Passed without objection. Agenda: Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Abbra Green, passed without objection. Unfinished Business: Bylaws revisions in comments: Article III: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green to strike Section 2. Passed without objection. Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green, to replace Article V, Section 3, subsection c with: “The Executive Committee and any at-large members of the State Committee shall be elected at each Regular Convention and shall hold office until adjournment sine die of the next Regular Convention or until their successors are elected.” Passed without objection. Article VI: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin to strike subsection c, Passed without objection. Article VI, Section 4: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin, to strike: “without violation of this section if their statement does not violate core principles.” and to Add: "if they clearly disclose they are expressing a personal opinion and not that of the Party. Approval and endorsement under this Article govern the Party's own support, resources, and communications. The Party reserves the right to object to the nomination paper of a person under these bylaws.” Passed without objection. Article VII, Section 2: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin, to Add to subsection a: "A documented written offer of good-faith resolution satisfies this requirement if the accused declines or fails to respond within fourteen (14) days." Passed without objection. Article VIII, Section 1.a: Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Austin Martin to add: "or Lifetime" after “Sustaining” in subsection 2. Passed without objection. Article VIII, Section 2.c: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin to replace subsection c with: "c. Disaffiliation: (1) A county affiliate may be disaffiliated for failure to maintain good standing under Section 1.d or to meet the requirements of Section 2 of this Article. (2) Before any disaffiliation vote, the affiliate shall receive written notice specifying each deficiency and no fewer than thirty (30) days to cure. If a deficiency remains uncured, the State Committee may disaffiliate the affiliate by two-thirds vote of the entire State Committee, after a hearing at which the affiliate may present evidence and be heard. The affiliate's representative shall not vote on the question. (3) Disaffiliation for any other cause requires a two-thirds vote at a State Convention. (4) A disaffiliated affiliate may appeal to the next State Convention by written notice to the Secretary no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the convention, where a majority vote of members present may reverse the disaffiliation." Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Austin Martin to amend to strike “The affiliate’s representative shall not vote on the question.” from subsection 2. Amendment passed without objection. The main motion passed without objection. Article IX, Section 1.b: Motion Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin to add: "Subsection b may not be used to amend this Article or Article VII. Any change adopted under subsection b shall be communicated to all members within seven (7) days of adoption and filed as required by law." Passed without objection. Article IX, Section 1.a: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Bryce Thon to Add: "or if it lacks bylaws committee approval” after “been perfected”. Passed without objection. Motion by Bryce Thon, second by Austin Martin to add a new article: "ARTICLE X: TRANSITION AND GENERAL PROVISIONS. Section 1. Effective Date. These bylaws take effect upon close of the meeting at which they are adopted, and supersede all prior bylaws. Actions validly taken under prior bylaws remain valid. Section 2. Transition. Officers and at-large Executive Committee members serving at the time of adoption continue in office until the next Regular Convention. Until that convention, at-large members elected under the prior bylaws serve as at-large members of the State Committee, and the Executive Committee consists of the four officers. Until the first county affiliate is recognized, the State Committee consists of the Executive Committee and the at-large members described in this section. Section 3. Severability. If any provision of these bylaws is held invalid, the remaining provisions continue in full force. Section 4. Dissolution. Upon dissolution of the Party, remaining assets shall be applied first to lawful obligations and then distributed consistent with applicable campaign finance law to one or more organizations advancing the Party's principles, as determined by a seven-eighths vote at a State Convention." Passed without objection. Assignments: Review the Bylaws Committee Report and the Platform Committee Report to be sent to the Executive Committee. Adjournment: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Bryce Thon 8:22 pm The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting: July 20, 2026 ⇰⇰⇰ Fill out our volunteer sign-up sheet to get tailored updates on committees & initiatives

On June 24, 2026, the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi unanimously adopted a Resolution for State Affiliate Autonomy. The resolution affirms the independence of state affiliates, challenges any claim of national authority to police affiliate communications without express bylaws authorization, and calls for written procedural standards before any affiliate can be disciplined. Similar models have since gone out to affiliates across the country, and the movement is growing. Wisconsin, Oregon, Delaware, and Maine have each passed resolutions of their own in recent weeks, all grounded in the same principle. Article 5, Section 5 of the Libertarian Party Bylaws states that the autonomy of affiliate parties "shall not be abridged by the National Committee". Events at the national level have made the need for these resolutions plain. There has been an ongoing pattern of tension over speech and communication at the national level. As Affiliates Pass Free-Speech Resolutions, National Leadership Suppression Increases. Our resolution takes no position on any specific affiliate's conduct or any pending proceeding. It addresses institutional principles. When national leadership claims authority over state communications without a textual basis in the bylaws, every affiliate's messaging is at risk. The Full Text of the Resolution RESOLUTION FOR STATE AFFILIATE SPEECH AUTONOMY Affirming Affiliate Autonomy and Procedural Due Process Within the Libertarian Party WHEREAS, The Libertarian Party of Hawaii is a chartered state-level affiliate of the Libertarian Party; WHEREAS, Article 5, Section 5 of the Libertarian Party Bylaws provides that "the autonomy of the affiliate and sub-affiliate parties shall not be abridged by the National Committee or any other committee of the Party, except as provided by these bylaws"; WHEREAS, the strength and integrity of the Libertarian Party have historically depended on the deliberative independence of its state affiliates, who reflect the political character and judgment of their respective state memberships; WHEREAS, recent action by the Libertarian National Committee raises questions of broad institutional concern about the scope of national authority over state affiliate communications and the procedural standards governing affiliate discipline; WHEREAS, the Bylaws of the Libertarian Party contain no express grant of authority to the National Committee to police the social-media or other speech of state affiliates beyond the specific affiliate-conduct prohibitions stated in Article 5, Section 4; WHEREAS, the National Committee's own most recently applied procedural standards for affiliate discipline — as demonstrated in the 2021 New Hampshire matter and the 2022 New Mexico matter — included advance notice to the affiliate, articulation of specific alleged conduct, opportunity to be heard, and in the 2021 matter the convening of an investigatory committee to develop the record before any sanction; WHEREAS, departure from those standards in any future affiliate-discipline matter would expose every state affiliate to discipline without procedural safeguards; WHEREAS, the Executive Committee of The Libertarian Party of Hawaii takes no position in this Resolution on the merits of any specific affiliate's conduct or any pending appellate proceeding, but addresses only the institutional principles governing affiliate autonomy and procedural fairness; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Libertarian Party of Hawaii affirms the autonomy of state affiliates as guaranteed by Article 5, Section 5 of the Bylaws, and the right of state affiliates to determine their own messaging and communications consistent with the Bylaws and the Statement of Principles. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii expresses concern about any assertion of National Committee authority to police state affiliate communications absent express bylaws authorization, and calls for the National Committee to articulate, with clarity and in writing, the textual bylaws basis for any such assertion of authority. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii urges that any disciplinary action by the National Committee against any affiliate be conducted with: (a) advance written notice to the affiliate; (b) particularized articulation of the specific conduct alleged and the specific bylaws provision alleged to have been violated; (c) a meaningful opportunity for the affiliate to respond before any vote; and (d) the convening of an investigatory committee to develop the factual record where the alleged conduct is material or contested — consistent with the National Committee's own most recent applied precedent. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii calls upon the National Committee to adopt and publish, through the appropriate bylaws or policy-manual process, written standards governing affiliate-discipline procedure, so that affiliates and their members may understand in advance the procedures by which their status may be reviewed. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii directs its Chair to transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Chair and Secretary of the Libertarian National Committee, to the Chair of the Judicial Committee, and to the chairs of the other state-level affiliates. Vote Adopted June 24, 2026 by the Executive Committee of The Libertarian Party of Hawaii by unanimous vote. A Look Ahead Per its final clause, the resolution has been transmitted to the Chair and Secretary of the Libertarian National Committee, the Chair of the Judicial Committee, and the chairs of every state-level affiliate. Any affiliate that shares these concerns is welcome to adapt this model for its own use. The individual is the smallest minority on earth. A party built on that principle cannot treat disagreements or choice of words as disorder. The Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi will continue to defend the independence of affiliates and the right of every affiliate to speak for itself.

This Independence Day, we’re kicking off our 1776 Freedom Fund from July 4 through July 31 to help grow the Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi. Every dollar donated to our state account goes toward building a stronger liberty movement here in Hawaiʻi. Your support helps us back Libertarian candidates, organize local meetups where people can connect face-to-face, and reach more Hawaiʻi residents through social media and educational content. If you’ve been looking for a way to help beyond sharing posts or attending events, this is one of the most direct ways to make an impact. Choose a level that works for you: 🇺🇸 $17.76 – Helps extend the reach of our social media and communications. 🗽 $177.60 – Helps cover the cost of a local meetup or outreach event. 🦅 $1,776 – Helps provide meaningful support to Libertarian candidates and larger statewide outreach efforts If those amounts aren’t the right fit, any contribution is appreciated and helps move the cause forward. Mahalo for standing with us, and have a safe and happy Fourth of July!

Celebrate 25 Years of Liberty: Join LPHI at the Grassroot Institute's Anniversary Gala The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii is celebrating its 25th anniversary of championing the values of individual liberty, economic freedom and limited, accountable government in Hawaii. To mark this milestone, Grassroot is hosting a special gala at the Sheraton Waikiki on Friday, Sept. 4, starting at 6 p.m. You're invited to join us for an evening of good food, inspiring speakers, and entertainment. This year, they will be featuring keynote speaker Adam Carolla, the comedian, podcast host, and New York Times bestselling author. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii is raising funds for a shared table at the event, and the Grassroot Institute has graciously offered LPHI members a discounted rate. For more details, contact LPHISecretary@gmail.com or call us today. Grassroot Institute of Hawaii & LPHI In the Same Fight If you've read our party history, the name behind the Grassroot Institute will already be familiar to you. The Institute was founded in 2001 by Richard "Dick" Rowland who, six years earlier, led the reform-minded "Imua" faction that reshaped the Libertarian Party of Hawaii at its pivotal 1995 convention and served as The Libertarian Party of Hawaii Chair from 1995 to 1997. Rowland was, in a very real sense, a builder of both organizations. When he set aside the LPHI chairmanship in 1997, it was in part to turn his energy toward the free-market educational mission that would eventually become Grassroot Institute of Hawaii. Rowland founded Grassroot on the conviction that, in his words, "If liberty is to be, it is up to me!" It's the same individual-first philosophy that has animated LPHI's work for more than fifty years. The two organizations have crossed paths at key moments since. In 2005, future Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson spoke at a Grassroot Institute breakfast during his Hawaii visit, the same year he addressed audiences across the islands. Rowland himself ran twice for U.S. Senate and once for Honolulu City Council, and remained one of Hawaii's most tireless warriors for liberty until his passing in November 2020. Today, the Grassroot Institute continues that work as a 501(c)(3) public-policy think tank, producing research on the issues that hit Hawaii families hardest including the Jones Act, the cost of living, government transparency, and accountable governance. Their mission statement: educating people about the principles of individual liberty, economic freedom, and limited, accountable government. We are a political party and they are an educational institute; different tools for the same job, but we spring from the same roots and fight for the same Hawaii. Celebrating Grassroot's 25 years is, in part, celebrating our own shared history. As Dick Rowland liked to say: Upward! We hope you'll join us. Contact Us to reserve your seat at the LPHI table. Can't attend, but want to help us pay for the table anyway? Donate today!

DATE: Monday, June 29, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting Call to Order of The Bylaws & Platform Committee: 7:02 pm HST Roll Call: Voting: Austin Martin, Abbra Green, Bryce Thon (entered 7:06), Nicholas Zehr; Viewing: Sonja Feintech, Bryce Briggs Minutes and bylaws revisions from June 15, 2026: Passed without objection Agenda: Passed without objection. Unfinished Business Platform: Read through comments from Platform Feedback survey Under freedom of speech, add a section distinguishing between freedom of speech and state speech: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin to add at the end of Freedom of Speech: “This protection belongs to individuals and private associations, not to the government itself, which has no inherent right to use public resources to promote its own speech” Passed without objection. Under criminal justice, add portions for due process, reading into the law, and jury nullification; consider changing the title on this section: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Bryce Thon to change the title to “Justice and the rights of the Accused” and to add “We support removing barriers that restrict entry into the practice of law. Mandatory licensing, costly credentialing, and monopolistic bar requirements limit access to legal representation, drive up its cost, and shield the legal profession from competition. Individuals should be free to offer and obtain legal services through voluntary arrangement, and clients should be free to decide for themselves whom they trust to represent them. We affirm the right of jurors to judge both the facts of a case and the justice of the law itself. Jury nullification is a vital and historic check against unjust prosecutions and oppressive statutes. Jurors should be fully informed that they may vote to acquit when applying a law would produce an unjust result, and we oppose any effort to conceal this right or to punish jurors for exercising their conscience.” Passed without objection. Motion by Abbra Green, second by Nicholas Zehr to add “We hold that no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Every individual is entitled to a presumption of innocence, timely and public notice of any charges, a fair and impartial hearing, the assistance of counsel, the right to confront witnesses and present a defense, and protection against double jeopardy, coerced confession, and unreasonable search and seizure. These protections apply equally to all, and we oppose their erosion through emergency powers, administrative shortcuts, or the expansion of penalties imposed without trial. Due process is not a technicality but the essential safeguard standing between the individual and the arbitrary use of government force.” Passed without objection. Motion by Nicholas Zehr, second by Abbra Green to amend to read “or institutional” after “government” Amendment passed without objection. New Business: Finish read-through starting at “Foreign Entanglements” Motion by Nicholas Zehr, second by Bryce Thon to change the first sentence to read: “The Libertarian Party of Hawaii strongly opposes interventionist foreign entanglements that compromise our sovereignty and divert our resources and young people from local priorities.” Passed without objection. Adjournment: Motion by Nicholas Zehr, second by Abbra Green, 7:49 The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting is Monday, July 06, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. HST.

75.9% Win Rate 274 Bills Tracked 212 Bills Opposed 57 Bills Supported 208 Successful Fights Roughly 3 wins for every loss! The gavel has come down on the 2026 Hawaii legislative session, and it was the most active, most effective session in LPHI history. From the opening day gavel on January 15 to the final adjournment on May 8, our team tracked 274 bills and 208 of those fights ended the way liberty needed them to. That's a 75.9% win rate. Roughly three victories for every loss. If you testified, called your representative, shared a blog post, donated, or simply showed up, this is your win too. We Authored Our Own Bill For the first time in a long time, LPHI set part of the legislative agenda ourselves. The Defend Hawaii Act (SB2054) was our flagship initiative. The bill would prohibit the Hawaii National Guard from being deployed to assist federal troops, federal law enforcement, or another state's national guard without the Governor's consent. The measure draws on the Second Amendment's Militia Clause, the Tenth Amendment, and bolstered by the Newsom v. Trump ruling out of California. We found legislators willing to sponsor it. We had a record number of testifiers in support, laying out the constitutional case. The bill moved through multiple readings and earned a formal committee report. This was a huge milestone for our party. It did not become law this session, but the seed is planted, the relationships are built, and the conversation is happening at the Capitol. We'll be back with Defend Hawaii in 2027, and we'll be better positioned than ever to get it across the finish line. A Growing Movement Metric 2025 Session 2026 Session Bills Tracked / Testified On 93 274 Volunteers 3 15+ Successes 72 208 Failures 21 66 Success Rate 77.42% 75.9% Flagship Initiative Stopped Kidnapping Bill Defend Hawaii (SB2054) Legislative Handbook Working Draft/unpublished Published and widely distributed Community Mobilization Social media & email campaigns Tailored volunteer lists & coordination In 2025, three people tracked 93 bills and posted a 77.42% success rate proving the model worked. In 2026, a growing team of 15+ volunteers nearly tripled that workload to 274 bills, while holding a success rate of 75.9% proving the model scales. While Defend Hawaii drew the spotlight, our volunteers were in the trenches on a long list of other issues this session: medical freedom and bodily autonomy, water fluoridation mandates, parental rights in custody disputes, homeschool oversight, agricultural property rights, and election integrity, among many others. The infamous Kidnapping Bill has now been deferred for three sessions running, because our team showed up every single time with better testimony, better research, and a bigger community behind us. 2026 Legislative Wrap-up The full 2026 Legislative Session Activism Report breaks down all 274 bills we tracked, the complete win/loss scorecard, our session-over-session growth from 2025 to 2026, and an appendix of blog posts and testimony we published throughout the session. Download the full 2026 Legislative Wrap Up Report: The 2027 Session Starts Now The legislature may have adjourned, but our work doesn't stop. Bills are already being drafted for January 2027, and the government will keep trying to expand. Here's how to make sure you're part of the next fight: Subscribe to our updates at libertarianhawaii.com Download the free Legislative Activism Handbook Create a Hawaii Legislature account and start tracking the bills that matter to you Email us at lphisecretary@gmail.com so we can pair you with issues you care about and walk you through the process. Join LPHI to receive updates and calls to action Mahalo to every volunteer, donor, and first-time testifier who made this session possible. This is your movement.

Hawaii’s law prohibiting licensed concealed-carry permit holders from carrying handguns on private property open to the public without the property owner’s express authorization violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The Supreme Court handed down a major Second Amendment ruling today. In a 6-3 decision in Wolford v. Lopez, the justices struck down Hawaii's so-called "vampire rule,". The law required licensed concealed carry permit holders to get explicit permission from a property owner before entering any business or establishment open to the public with a firearm. Under Hawaii's law, every stop in your day from gas stations, to restaurants, to the hardware store required you to seek prior permission just to exercise a right the Constitution already guarantees. The bureaucratic obstacle was designed to make lawful carry practically impossible. Hawaii's Act 52 made it a misdemeanor for a permit holder to carry a firearm onto private property open to the public unless the property owner or operator gave express authorization. That authorization could be given verbally, in writing, or through clearly visible signage. In other words, the default was "no guns,". Gun owners had to navigate a patchwork of individual business decisions just to legally move through daily life. Three concealed carry permit holders and the Hawaii Firearms Coalition sued Hawaii Attorney General Anne E. Lopez in federal court, arguing the law effectively turned much of the public sphere into a gun-free zone. The Supreme Court Ruling Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito summed it up well: "This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives… We hold that the law is unconstitutional." The majority also directly confronted Hawaii's attempt to find historical cover for the law. The state leaned on an 1865 Louisiana statute as evidence of a historical tradition of requiring permission before carrying firearms onto another's property. The Court rejected this attempted framing, because the law was part of the post-Civil War Black Codes. Ironically, its intent was to specifically disarm newly freed Black Americans. The ruling also likely invalidates similar laws in California, Maryland, New York, and New Jersey. These states all adopted similar default bans after the Court's 2022 Bruen decision. They were all trying to find a new workaround to restrict carry after their old disarming methods were struck down. The Dissenters The three liberal justices dissented. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, framed the issue as one of property rights rather than gun rights. Jackson accused the majority of manipulating its 2022 Second Amendment decision into something that "lets the judiciary thwart the will of legislatures by privileging access to firearms above all else." While property rights do matter, the ruling does not strip property owners of anything. Private property owners may still prohibit firearms on their premises. The onus now simply falls on those owners to post signage banning guns. The default should land on the side of freedom above restriction. A business owner who wants to ban firearms on their land still can. The Fear-Mongering Ensues In predictable fashion, Governor Josh Green went on Hawaii News Now this morning and predicted more gun violence as a result of the ruling, stating it will encourage gun owners to “carry more aggressively". The angle we can likely expect in the next legislative session is the attempt to require liability insurance for gun owners. Green’s claims are nothing but fear mongering. Forty-five states already presume it is lawful to carry on private property open to the public unless owners post otherwise. If the "vampire rule" were a meaningful safeguard against violence, you would expect those 45 states to be swimming in shooting incidents at gas stations and grocery stores. It’s a baseless manufactured narrative that’s been way overplayed. As Alito put it: "The Second Amendment has the same meaning in all parts of the United States." The full Supreme Court ruling is publicly available. The SCOTUSblog case page also has a solid breakdown of the procedural history and all filings in the case.

DATE: Monday, June 15, 2026 TIME: 7:00 pm HST Call to Order: 7:10 pm HST. Roll Call: Austin Martin, Nicholas Zehr, Abbra Green Minutes and bylaws revisions from May 18, 2026: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Nicholas Zehr, Passed without objection. Agenda: Motion by Abbra Green, second by Austin Martin, passed without objection. Unfinished Business: Bylaws to be sent to parliamentarians for review. New Business: Platform Draft feedback overview and read-through: Motion by Austin Martin, second by Abbra Green to change “land stewardship and” to “land ownership and environmental stewardship,” in “Pramble”, passed without objection Motion by Austin Martin second by Nicholas Zehr to “...and related innovations.” after “right”, in “Right to Self Defense” passed without objection Motion by Austin Martin second by Nicholas Zehr to add “or corporations” after “individuals”, in “Property Rights”, passed without objection. Motion by Austin Martin, second by Nicholas Zehr to place “Accountability is better served by upholding corporate and individual responsibility, rather than blanket regulatory systems which stifle the free market.”, within “Environmental Policy”, passed without objection. Assignments: Under freedom of speech, add a section distinguishing between freedom of speech and state speech Under criminal justice, add portions for due process, reading into the law, and jury nullification; consider changing the title on this section. Adjournment: 8:03 pm HST. The Next Bylaws & Platform Committee Meeting Monday, June 29, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. Have suggestions For the Bylaws & Platform Committee? Contact us.