Should UH's former lead attorney sit on Hawaii's Supreme Court?

We want to share our serious concerns about UHʻs former lead attorney getting onto the Hawai`i Supreme Court.

Darolyn Heim Lendio — one of the nominees for the open Hawai’i Supreme Court seat — was UH’s legal advisor during key years that led to the huge community conflict over Mauna Kea.

If you are also worried about this nominee sitting on the Supreme Court for the next 10 years (and possibly more), please consider posting your concerns on the Governor's website here: https://governor.hawaii.gov/contact-us/contact-the-governor/

We’ve provided a little more insight into our questions about this nomination below:

---

Four people have made the short-list for an opening on the Hawai‘i Supreme Court: Todd Eddins, David Forman, Ben Lowenthal, and Darolyn Heim Lendio. There are many reasons to support the first three candidates, but we have deep reservations about Lendio.

Lendio is one of two judges and the only woman on the list, which on its face suggests a nominee with relevant expertise who would bring more diverse representation to the Court. But, more importantly, she is a former corporate and government attorney who worked as UH’s general counsel and vice president for legal affairs for almost 9 years beginning in September 2006. It was during this time that a number of controversial administrative decisions were made at UH, which resulted in sharp community resistance to the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) project.

Right now, the Governor is deciding which of the four candidates should be nominated for the open seat on the Hawaii Supreme Court. If nominated by the Governor, and confirmed by the Senate, Lendio would serve on Hawai’i’s highest court during a time with important decisions about our ʻāina and our communities on the horizon. With such responsibility, we believe a candidate should have an established track record of sound decision making.

To address our concerns, we would like some of the following questions to be answered:

• Did Lendio advise UH’s 2010 decision to apply for a permit to construct the TMT on Mauna Kea?
• Between 2009 and 2014, was Lendio involved in the decision to pay the Carlsmith Ball law firm a large portion of the $8million UH paid to outside legal counsel? Relatedly, were those payments used in connection with the 2011-2013 contested case against the TMT?
• Was former-Attorney General Doug Chin at Carlsmith Ball when UH was employing that firm? As Chin was instrumental in creating the 2015 “emergency rules” for Mauna Kea, that led to 8 arrests, it would be important to make this connection. These rules, by the way, were ultimately deemed unlawful by the Third Circuit Court.
• When an accounting professor sought information on the amount UH was paying to outside private law firms, was Lendio involved in the decision to charge him the very steep sum of $40,000 for that information? Susan Hippensteele, a lawyer and then-head of the Manoa Faculty Senate stated "UH has essentially ensured that there will never be transparency if their billing statements do, in fact, contain detailed attorney-client information."
• As general counsel and vice president of legal affairs, did Lendio advise the UH Board of Regents on matters that included the premature pursuit of permits for TMT construction?
  
  

In addition to these questions about her role in decision-making around the controversial proposal to build the TMT, we also have concerns about Lendioʻs role at UH through the so-called Stevie "Wonder Blunder," (in which a special committee stated that Lendio’s Office of General Council “failed to perform their oversight duties”) as well as her role as a Bishop Estate Trusteesʻ counsel during a period of immense legal turmoil at that educational institution. If the rule of law is to prevail during these uncertain times, we think it is important to demand candidates of the highest standard to serve on the stateʻs supreme court.