HILO — Puna Councilwoman Jen Ruggles says she will not attend County Council meetings this week because she doesn’t think her questions on the political status of the Hawaiian Kingdom have been adequately addressed.
Ruggles, who represents District 5 in upper Puna, surprised her colleagues nearly two weeks ago by stating she would not be voting or chairing committees because she thinks such actions could constitute war crimes against the kingdom, overthrown by U.S.-backed interests in 1893. She then asked the county to give her a written opinion.
In response to her query, county Corporation Counsel Joe Kamelamela gave her a four-sentence letter that said she would “not incur any criminal liability under state, federal and international law” by carrying out her duties as an elected official.
But that didn’t resolve the issue for Ruggles, who has retained attorney Stephen Laudig as her own legal counsel on the matter. Laudig responded to Kamelamela in an Aug. 28 letter stating the county’s answer lacked substance.
Ruggles said she wants to attend the meetings but can’t while continuing to abstain from voting. Council rules require everyone to vote unless there is a stated conflict of interest.
As a result, the councilwoman said she will be absent until she is satisfied that she is not incurring criminal liability under international humanitarian law for legislating and “being complicit in the collection of taxes, foreclosures and criminal prosecutions.”
That could leave her council district effectively without representation until her term ends in December, even as she remains in office. Ruggles didn’t run for re-election, though her name remained on the primary ballot because of her late withdrawal.
“I’m hopeful (Kamelamela) will give me a proper legal opinion,” she said, adding she is following the advice of her attorney. “I’m anticipating he will do his job.”
In an Aug. 21 letter to Kamelamela, Laudig takes the position that the United States is illegally occupying Hawaii because the islands were annexed without a treaty and that the kingdom continues to exist as an independent state. He states his client has become “aware of the history of the United States’ illegal occupation of the Hawaiian Kingdom.”
Ruggles said Kamelamela has offered to meet with her, but she stated she is looking for another written opinion from him.
She raised the issue after Keanu Sai, whose website says he is the kingdom’s acting council of regency, sent a letter to elected officials. It contained a memorandum from Alfred deZayas, identified as an independent expert to the United Nations, that characterized the islands as a “sovereign nation-state in continuity.”
Ruggles said that implies that her constituents have certain rights under international law.
“I don’t want to violate their rights,” she said, “and I believe they deserve an answer.”
Ruggles said she is still carrying out other duties of her office, including asking the Federal Emergency Management Agency if Hawaiian Acres can receive funding to repair private roads damaged by Hurricane Lane.
However, she won’t be introducing bills and resolutions, believing that could constitute a war crime.
That includes a measure to require the county to transition to eco-friendly alternatives to certain herbicides.
Blake Watson, a council aide to Ruggles, said the bill was to be heard this week, but was pulled from the agenda.
“It was already written and submitted,” he said, “and maybe some other council member can bring it forward some other day.”
Still, Watson said he doesn’t think the votes are there without Ruggles, and he was doubtful that the next council, which will contain some new members that he considers more conservative on the issue, will take it up.
“We are kind of disappointed and not sure of what to do next,” said Watson, who has been involved in efforts to restrict pesticide use on the island for the past several years.
He added that he was not speaking against Ruggles’ position on the issue of the kingdom and still supports her.
Ruggles said she has heard from constituents concerned about the bill being pulled.
She said she told them that she doesn’t take the letter she received from Sai lightly.
“I believe this is a legitimate question,” Ruggles said.
“… It’s been very difficult, it was a very difficult decision. But I had to go with my conscience and what integrity means to me.”
Other measures of hers being dropped pertain to the possibility of Puna Geothermal Venture restarting and requiring county departments to report levels of service in different districts. The latter, she said, would have been intended to address disparities in county services, such as police or fire.
Ruggles said she thinks she is still doing her job as an elected official and stated that she is working “full time.”
“Right now, I am asking a question,” she said. “That’s all I’m doing.”
Ruggles acknowledged that she could still vote and introduce legislation while raising this issue.
“I can, but because of the implications behind the question, I am proceeding with caution from the knowledge that I have gained,” she said.
Ruggles said the difference between now and the duties she has performed since she was elected in 2016 is that she “wasn’t aware of the facts” before.
“I know that this question I’m asking is very challenging,” she said. “It challenges our assumptions about, or questions our assumptions, about what we believe to be true. That question needs to be asked. I believe it deserves a legal answer.”
In the meantime, Ruggles said she will continue receiving her council salary, which amounts to about $70,000 a year.
“I don’t know why my salary keeps coming up,” she responded.
As for what happens if the county’s legal team doesn’t give her an answer she considers satisfactory, Ruggles said that’s “yet to be decided,” including whether she will step down.
She also plans to hold a community meeting on the issue, which she hopes will happen in the next three weeks. Ruggles said she is asking the county Department of Parks and Recreation for permission to use the Keaau Community Center.
Email Tom Callis at tcallis@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
“Laudig takes the position that the United States is illegally occupying Hawaii because the islands were annexed without a treaty”
For someone that claims to know what he is talking about, and a councilwoman that should know the workings of our U.S. Government, they both show quite an ignorance.
By a vote of 209-91 in the House, and 42-21 affirmative vote (exactly 2/3rds vote) in the U.S. Senate, then signed by the President McKinley, the annexation treaty offer (unanimously voted on by the Republic of Hawaii Legislature that was dominated by Polynesian-Hawaiians in 1897) the Treaty was accepted by way of a Congressional-Executive Agreement method.
For anyone that would like to first search: Congressional-Executive Agreement
Then search: Treaty of Annexation of the Republic of Hawaii for actual text.
There are two ways in which our Government may accept a treaty. If the President believes he has enough votes to receive a 2/3rds majority in only the Senate, he may chose to have it voted on only in the Senate. This is called the “Treaty method”. Or, it may be introduced into Congress just like a bill that requires a simple majority in both the House and the Senate, then signed by the President. This is called an “Congressional-Executive Agreement” method. The result of both are a treaty, but the methods have different names only to distinguish between which way it was passed.
Bill Clinton most recently passed the NAFTA Treaty with Mexico and Canada, as well as the World Trade Organization (WTO) by was of Congressional-Executive Agreement method.
Many times people make the argument that it was “never ratified” because they don’t know that there are two ways in which our Government may pass a treaty. So they run around like Laudig taking advantage of unknowing folks and claim there “is no treaty”. But, of course there is.
And, as it did receive a 2/3rds majority in the Senate, a claim can also be made that it also met the requirements of only being passed by the Senate.
With these sovereignty fringers something is always “illegal”, or “didn’t happen”. What is funny is in over 120 years it has never been challenged in court! Hmm.
Come on Laudig, put up or shut up!
Appreciate the informational posting, and not taking a stand either way.. but would appreciate some clarification on a couple points: 1. Isn’t the “never ratified” argument primarily made relative to the Draft Treaty of Annexation, and *not* the joint resolution process by which the U.S. ultimately “annexed” Hawaii (and which your post mostly focused on)? 2. Wasn’t the actual vote you referred to “42 for, 21 against, and 6 abstain” — which would *not* be a 2/3rds majority?
Seems like the main thrust of the pro-Sovereignty arguments I’ve seen is that the *Draft Treaty* was never properly ratified by the Republic of Hawaii (as required by Article VII of the treaty)… and then, that the joint resolution ultimately used as the legal basis for annexation was more of a “takeover”/end-around done without the actual consent/agreement of the Republic.
The Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, says that the Senate may agree to a treaty “provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.” There is no rule regarding Senators who are absent from the chamber (i.e., not present) for the vote. If a Senator is present in the chamber and wishes to abstain while also officially recording that he is present, the way he does it is by voting “present.” For example, that’s what Senator Sam Nunn (D, GA) did on the apology resolution in 1993. Another example is from the cloture vote on the Akaka bill in 2006: Senator Lindsay Graham had actually voted on the floor on a different matter moments before the Akaka cloture vote; but he was so torn apart by demands from his wife to support it vs. demands from his Republican conservative colleagues to oppose it, that he stepped outside the chamber and therefore was not “present” and did not record himself as “present.” In the case of the Treaty of Annexation, the vote was 42-21, with lots of Senators apparently absent because nobody voted “present.” So according to the rule in the Constitution, the Treaty passed the Senate by the required 2/3 vote 42-21, since those 63 Senators were the only ones officially “present” for the vote.
Appreciate the clarification, Ken.
Thanks Dr. Conklin, it is quite common for Senators that do not want to vote one way or another to leave the Senate and go back to their offices for a drink, then come back to the chambers after the vote. That is why by the afternoon the smell of alcohol is quite prevalent on many of the Senators. Go to the Senate and watch sometime, you will see Senators doing this.
In any case, it did pass 42 in favor to 21 against, a two-thirds majority. Once that occurred the vote in the House that passed it by way over two-thirds 209-91 was somewhat a moot subject.
We don’t search propaganda! Go home Ami! Take your military crap and f… off.
“I don’t know why my salary keeps coming up”
Because we’re paying a maniac?? But never mind, it’s a legitimate beef (unlike the rest of her nonsense). We’re paying all the other incompetents in this government, why call out one crazy woman? Hey, she’s not even voting, which means she can do no harm.
What a raging hypocrite! Under international law, the Kingdom of Hawaii was forcibly annexed, and no one outside complained at the time, and it has been recognized for over 100 years since than as US territory. Moral? Absolutely not. Legal? Absolutely.
Well, that gets a little more difficult. Legal in terms of Congress following their own rules? Yeah. Legal in that the Hawaiians went along with it? Absolutely not, there was armed resistance, put down by a group of businessman, and passive resistance in the form of petitions to Congress that derailed the initial attempt, until war pushed those objections besides.
More to the point, nations have conquered other nations throughout recorded history, and you can’t roll that back, the Carthaginians can hardly petition the Roman Senate for their land back, or the descendants of the Nubian line of Pharaohs for deeds to Cairo. What’s done is done, Hawaii is a state, and it’s going to stay that way, white social justice warriors like this nut aside.
You think if you occupy and destroy a country and murder its population you are right? Well than you are not better than the Nazi Germans. Back to Nuremberg! The whole World is fed up with US criminals.
No, not right, just not reversible. Once the maps are drawn, there’s no going back.
As to US “criminals”, what whole world are you talking about? The rest of the college of nations hardly has an unstained record!
What a hypocrite! She believes that Hawaii could possibly be Illegally occupied, while at the same time lobby FEMA for federal tax dollar to repair roads in her district.
And accept tax payer salary dollars. Perhaps she should be paid in “Kingdom” money?
What’s Kingdom money, shells? I don’t know, with the reef being so damaged by the warm water, there’s not much washing up these days. Maybe particularly smooth rocks? Or maybe nothing, we just make hand gestures like we’re passing imaginary money over to her, that would be the most fitting.
Hehehe exactly POWest….perhaps some shiny smoothed glass. But you got my point as you often do!
American white punks are ridiculous!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a5d89914613702b2c51f3c7b21258a20f63fc5973d94c0ed8bcc56f6459be2a6.jpg
Why do you worry! A trillion dollar of tax payer money for the military and 158 billion each year for Israel!
So “Nope” what you are saying is thatr you support not doing your job and getting paid for it?
Get your facts straight. The U.S. has given Israel $137 billion in aid since WWII, nearly 80 years ago. The next ten years will see $38 billion sent to Israel, but note, much of that is money to buy U.S. made planes and defensive missiles.
The 2019 defense budget is only 59% of your number: $590 billion.
The whole US is illegally occupied! North-America was stolen from the American Indians! Pack your things go home where you came from! Especial the military scumbags.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/32d15e8f78d26f867f23152b81ed22863029eecd4afe62c380484266f4bc5cb1.jpg
and remember,
China Dictator Xi Jinping would looooveeee her to be successful.
The S. China Sea, Taiwan, Pearl Harbor, etc.
….what more could he ask for
……besides Calif and its “red line” 2 miles off the coast to stop him?
China does not have a dictator only US has a fascist, insane brutal and stupid regime of imbeciles! But that matches the imbecile populations of USA.
Haaa, Haaa, Haaa,
I have bridge from Hawi to Hanna to sell’ya, cheap!
Whatever your “on”, please stop. It has made your posts highly delusional.
Of course there is always more to the story. Ruggles’ father is up on Federal Drug Charges, so if she can make a claim that U.S. law does not have jurisdiction here then they must drop the charges.
Like that will happen. LOL
Not seeing any *Federal* drug charges against her father — only the State case being held in Hilo Circuit Court.
The US is failed rogue fascist state, with a criminal justice system, just like the one the had in Nazi Germany! The Nazi scum is now in USA and tries desperately to rule the World by murdering and enslave people! You think it is normal to drop bombs on school buses like the US scum did in Yemen?
Do they Drug check these people? If not perhaps they should!
That was funny…
Yes and No eah Susan…..? Its hard to believe there is no way to remove this person from their position when we are paying them. Glad she is not in my district.
Local politicians are really not powerful enough to cause any damage. She has dug her own grave with this. No worries, it will take care of itself
Yea I get it but the issue is she is wasting time as we need to have productive politicians. As we can see in DC the effects of idiots from the past 20 years.
I totally get where you are coming from (sorry , there came the Cali in me…don’t hold it against me please…what I was trying to say is that I believe that because of what is currently going on in Washington will assure that this is nipped in the bud (get it?). We here have no tolerance for it, and I believe that the council and certainly my hero Harry Kim will certainly not put up with this.
There is currently too much pressure on the council now with what we are all going through to allow this to happen. I have faith that this will be solved very quickly….I am very disappointed that she chose now to get involved with this subject with so many things that are crucial to the well being of our residents, especially those in her district. I really don’t understand what she is thinking.
I don’t know why she should be getting a salary if she is not performing her duties….Reminds me of congress getting paid when they shut down the government
Ruggles’ lawyer Steve Laudig is a real weirdo. Ever since arriving in Hawaii he has been an active campaigner for Hawaiian independence, spouting all the Keanu Sai nonsense. Where did he pick up that junk? For example, in 2005 he was editor of the Hawaiian Journal of Law and Politics, founded by Keanu Sai at UH Manoa to spew Sai’s propaganda as though it has academic respectability. That editorship in 2005 was very shortly after Laudig arrived here after leaving his law career in Indianapolis. Why did he come here? How did he get to be such an “expert” on Hawaiian history and law in such a short time? I suggest something went horribly wrong in Indiana, so he chose to come to paradise for a fresh start, and immediately hooked up with the most easy-to-please gang of crazies he could find in order to have a circle of “friends” to hang with. Then, a couple years ago, I seem to recall seeing his Facebook page describing himself as living in China! Now back again like a warped boomerang. That career path reminds me somewhat of another attorney, Gary Dubin, whose law career on the mainland included prison time, who came to Hawaii and hooked up with Keanu Sai to “represent” him at the “World Court” hearings in the Hague, and is now a partner with sleezy ex-Gov Waihe’e in a company focusing on fighting home foreclosures. Funny how washed-up lawyers gravitate to Keanu Sai for easy entry into high-profile publicity stunts in Hawaiian sovereignty gigs.
Americans and their military should leave the Islands! Go home!
Perhaps you should be the first to leave if you feel so strongly, as I bet you have American citizenship. You could be part of the solution instead of the perceived problem.
Not sure where all the Americans would “go home” as this is home for 1.4 million people.
I’m afraid if all the Americans left, there would only be tourists from Canada, Asia and other parts of the world.
If you like the politics on the Big Island, just keep voting the same way you have for the past few decades…
Agree, and applies to the state as a whole. But I think one significant flaw with our democratic political system is that the best & brightest rarely run for political office… instead, we get a lot of fairly mediocre candidates, often with self-serving interests on top of that.
Then of course, there’s the sheeplistic, “vote Democrat” mindset of our one-party state.
And finally — now more than ever, the possibility is very real that anything you’ve ever said or done, even privately, will be dredged up, scrutinized and used to discredit and embarrass you. Who wants to subject themselves and their families to that?! In that sense at least, I give credit to anyone willing to run for public office.
So in the end, voters aren’t always left with great choices…
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ab594ca7a8ee0223cc604f4016dd4632cc87237cfc8efdbe96344c8ab0d9602.jpg
Good for her! The rest of the council is just despicable and self enriching. Hail – to the Kingdom of Hawaii!
At least get it right. The current sovereignty movement calls itself the Hawaiian Kingdom.
By serving as a council member she “legitimizes” the government she now claims is illegitimate. And gets a check.