Hawaii is vigorously protesting “NO KING – NO TYRANT – NO ICE ” to demand constitutional Due Process for all.
Yet, four (4) Hawaii State House Representatives – Sean Quinlan, Scott Matayoshi, Lisa Marten, and Ikaika Olds – have introduced House Bill 1861 aka HB29 to deny DUE Process to all Hawaii counties.
HB1861 (2026) authorizes counties to sell property through non-judicial foreclosure as a way to collect unpaid civil fines. Owners cannot go to court to explain or protect themselves. Period. Judicial Due Process is denied.
Yet, four (4) Hawaii State House Representatives – Sean Quinlan, Scott Matayoshi, Lisa Marten, and Ikaika Olds – have introduced House Bill 1861 aka HB29 to deny DUE Process to all Hawaii counties.
HB1861 (2026) authorizes counties to sell property through non-judicial foreclosure as a way to collect unpaid civil fines. Owners cannot go to court to explain or protect themselves. Period. Judicial Due Process is denied.
This stealth anti Due Process agenda has been happening for five years!
The Honolulu County Blangiardi Administration spear-headed this hamajang in 2021 through House Bill 1434 /Senate Bill 2110 – requesting a new NON-JUDICIAL Power of Sale based on the Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) civil fines. The Mayor’s DPP Director testified that existing “Eminent Domain” was too slow, took manpower, and resources.
Can you trust the troubled DPP to be your Police, Prosecutor, Judge, Jury, and Executioner?
Look at Kalihi, Kamuki, Kailua, Kaneohe, Kahuku. Look at Waimanalo, Waianae, Wahiawa and Whitmore. What about Palolo, Mo’ili’ili, Sunset Beach, and Haleiwa? How many residents have turned their garages into extra living space or other additions to accommodate generational living or a little extra income to help pay for their mortgage? Is housing a huge problem in Hawaii?
This ill-thought unconstitutional bill will turn Hawaii’s private property owners and renters into perennial sitting ducks. The long arm of the government will be allowed to create a new source of revenue, bully, do political mischief, or issue violations at will that can morph into significant fines, ripe for non-judicial foreclosure.
Which legislator in 2026 would deny basic Constitutional Due Process Rights (through HB1861) as a “quick solution” to various issues some Counties have no will to manage.
No amount of contorted promises of “Due Process” through county appeals can justify this sweeping unconstitutional invasion and violation of Civil Rights to all Hawaii.
HB1861 aka HB29 is burning down a Cathedral to fry an egg.
Give Voice Now. Don’t complain AFTER-THE-FACT. Contact your legislators, Mayors, and City Councils. Elected legislators must stay inside the Constitutional Path for the Public Good.
Kill HB1861 hamajang!
Nothing good can come out by giving the long arm of government MORE new powers to control its people.
STATUS OF HB1861 ONLY Representatives Garcia, Gedeon, Pierick, Shimizu voting no. “Reservations is a YES vote.”
2/17/2026
H
Passed Second Reading as amended in HD 1 and referred to the committee(s) on JHA with Representative(s) Alcos, Amato, Matsumoto voting aye with reservations; Representative(s) Garcia, Gedeon, Pierick, Shimizu voting no (4) and Representative(s) Cochran, Lee, M., Poepoe excused (3).
2/17/2026
H
Reported from WAL (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 339-26) as amended in HD 1, recommending passage on Second Reading and referral to JHA.
2/10/2026
H
The committee on WAL recommend that the measure be PASSED, WITH AMENDMENTS. The votes were as follows: 7 Ayes: Representative(s) Hashem, Morikawa, Ichiyama, Woodson, Souza; Ayes with reservations: Representative(s) Belatti, Poepoe; 2 Noes: Representative(s) Iwamoto, Shimizu; and Excused: none.
2/6/2026
H
Bill scheduled to be heard by WAL on Tuesday, 02-10-26 9:00AM in House conference room 411 VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE.
1/26/2026
H
Referred to WAL, JHA, referral sheet 2 (FINANCE COMMITTEE IS DELETED in 2026. FINANCE COMMITTEE DEFERRED SIMILAR BILL HB29 in 2025.)
Good public policies are vetted carefully in an over-arching manner. They must be rooted within the parameters of the US Constitution that have served us well for 235 years.
There are some very troublesome bills – SB875, HB15. HB538, HB106, SB216, HB 498 that are introduced this 2023 session.
The language may vary in these Bills but the core violation is the taking of private property based on civil fines, without providing the judicial court process. It’s not about the market value or the balance of the sold property loot.
I get it that certain politicians are hoping for easier and quicker penalties like non-judicial foreclosures. But to think that the counties can seize private property based on civil fines is misguided. We can’t have knee-jerk legislation just because we want to punish some “egregious” private property owners or to create a new source of income revenues.
Counties cannot become the in-house Police, Prosecutor, Jury, Judge, and Executioner.
The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it best in one of her last Opinions for the US Supreme Court in Timbs vs Indiana relating to excessive CIVIL fines and Due Process. Below are some of jurist RBG’s excerpts to all of us from the grave:
“This Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause incorporates the protections contained in the Bill of Rights, rendering them applicable to the States.”
“For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history: Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties. Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies, as the Stuarts’ critics learned several centuries ago.”
” Protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history for good reason: Such fines undermine other liberties. They can be used, e.g., to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies. They can also be employed, not in service of penal purposes, but as a source of revenue. The historical and logical case for concluding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Excessive Fines Clause is indeed overwhelming.”
“Even absent a political motive, fines may be employed “in a measure out ofaccord with the penal goals of retribution and deterrence,” for “fines are asource of revenue,”
” In short, the historical and logical case for concluding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Excessive Fines Clause is overwhelming. Protection against excessive punitive economic sanctions secured by the Clause is, to repeat, both “fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty” and “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.”
