The Kamehameha Schools admissions lawsuit is a federal case filed on October 20, 2025, by Students for Fair Admissions, asking a U.S. district court in Honolulu to strike down the private school’s longstanding preference for applicants of Native Hawaiian ancestry as racial discrimination in contracting under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.1Courthouse News Service. SFFA v. Kamehameha Schools Complaint The case is docketed as 1:25-cv-00450 and remains in early motion practice; no trial date has been set.2Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. SFFA v. Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop
What SFFA Is Asking the Court to Do
Students for Fair Admissions is the organization founded by Edward Blum that won the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court decision ending race-conscious admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.3Spectrum News Hawaiʻi. Anti-Affirmative Action Group Targets Kamehameha It brought the Kamehameha suit on behalf of two anonymous families, “Family A” and “Family B,” with Jesse Franklin-Murdock of the Dhillon Law Group as lead counsel.4Honolulu Civil Beat. Kamehameha Schools Sued Over Native Hawaiian Admissions Policy SFFA spent the prior month soliciting plaintiffs through a site called KamehamehaNotFair.org.5Hawaiʻi Public Radio. Anti-Affirmative Action Group Targets Kamehameha Schools Admissions Policy
The complaint rests on one statute: 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Reconstruction-era law guaranteeing all persons the same right to make and enforce contracts regardless of race. Because Kamehameha Schools receives no federal funding, the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act do not apply directly, leaving § 1981 as the plaintiffs’ route into federal court.6Native American Rights Fund. Kamehameha Schools En Banc Opinion SFFA argues the admissions process is contractual in nature because it involves application agreements, enrollment contracts, and tuition obligations, and that using race to allocate those contracts violates the statute.7PR Newswire. Students for Fair Admissions Sues Kamehameha Schools to End Race-Based Admissions
The Admissions Policy Under Attack
Kamehameha Schools is a private K-12 system funded by a trust holding roughly $15 billion in assets, including more than 370,000 acres of Hawaiʻi real estate.8Honolulu Civil Beat. Money, Power and Status Make Kamehameha Schools a Rich Target It enrolls around 7,200 students across three campuses.9Kamehameha Schools Investments. Impact
Under its admissions policy, qualified Native Hawaiian applicants are admitted first; non-Hawaiian applicants may be considered only if seats remain. Ancestry is documented through birth certificates, with no minimum blood-quantum requirement.10ICNL. The Kamehameha Schools Admissions Policy Controversy SFFA alleges no non-Native Hawaiian student has been admitted in at least 15 years.1Courthouse News Service. SFFA v. Kamehameha Schools Complaint
The preference traces to the 1883 will of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, which directed trustees to give “preference to Hawaiians of pure or part aboriginal blood” in the trust’s educational work.11Native American Rights Fund. Doe v. Kamehameha Schools
Why SFFA Thinks It Can Win Now
The policy has been challenged before. In Doe v. Kamehameha Schools, a non-Hawaiian applicant sued under § 1981 in 2003. The Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld the policy 8-7 in December 2006, applying a Title VII-style test that asked whether the preference addressed a “manifest imbalance” in Native Hawaiian educational outcomes without unnecessarily harming non-preferred groups.12FindLaw. Kamehameha Schools Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate v. Doe The parties settled for $7 million in May 2007, just before the Supreme Court could decide whether to take the case, leaving the en banc ruling as binding circuit precedent.13SCOTUSblog. Hawaiian Schools Admission Fight Back in Court
SFFA’s central argument is that the ground under Doe has shifted. The complaint contends that the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in SFFA v. Harvard abrogated the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning by requiring any racial classification in admissions to satisfy strict scrutiny rather than the more lenient framework the Ninth Circuit used.1Courthouse News Service. SFFA v. Kamehameha Schools Complaint The Harvard case itself was decided under the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI and did not directly address § 1981, though legal scholars have noted its reasoning has since been extended to § 1981 challenges against private institutions, including a federal appeals court’s temporary injunction against a private grant program in the Fearless Fund case.14Stanford Law School. SFFA v. Harvard FAQ: Navigating the Evolving Implications of the Court’s Ruling
SFFA also leans on Rice v. Cayetano, the 2000 Supreme Court decision striking down a Hawaiʻi law that limited voting for Office of Hawaiian Affairs trustees to those of Hawaiian ancestry. Rice held that ancestry can operate as a “proxy for race.”15Justia. Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495 SFFA cites the ruling to argue “Native Hawaiian” is a racial classification, not a political one, and therefore subject to strict scrutiny.7PR Newswire. Students for Fair Admissions Sues Kamehameha Schools to End Race-Based Admissions The complaint further argues that the educational-disparity data Kamehameha relied on two decades ago is now “stale.”1Courthouse News Service. SFFA v. Kamehameha Schools Complaint
How Kamehameha Is Defending the Policy
Trustees and CEO Jack Wong said after the filing that “the facts and the law are on our side, and we are confident that we will prevail.”4Honolulu Civil Beat. Kamehameha Schools Sued Over Native Hawaiian Admissions Policy The school characterizes the preference as a remedial measure tied to Congress’s recognition of a special relationship with Native Hawaiians, pointing to statutes such as the Native Hawaiian Education Act and the 1993 Apology Resolution acknowledging the wrongful overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy.11Native American Rights Fund. Doe v. Kamehameha Schools
Kamehameha is also attacking the plaintiffs’ standing. School attorney Joachim Cox told the court that admissions begins with a scoring phase based on grades, test scores, teacher references, and interviews, conducted without regard to ancestry, and that the two named plaintiffs did not score high enough in that phase to reach the stage where ancestry is considered.16Honolulu Civil Beat. Teens Suing Kamehameha Didn’t Have Scores to Get In, Lawyer Says
Eliminating Tuition to Undercut the Contract Theory
Because § 1981 protects the right to make and enforce contracts, SFFA’s claim depends on characterizing enrollment as a contractual arrangement. Kamehameha responded with an unusual move: it petitioned the state probate court to eliminate tuition altogether and reframe attendance as a charitable “gift.” Trustees filed a 14-page petition arguing that free attendance was consistent with the trust’s charitable purpose and rejected what they described as a “Western contractual lens” being used to challenge the school.17Honolulu Civil Beat. Can Kamehameha Fend Off Admissions Lawsuit With Free Tuition
On January 30, 2026, Probate Judge Jeanette Castagnetti approved the change, finding Princess Pauahi’s will gave trustees authority to decide whether to charge tuition. The new “complete gift” model covers tuition, meals, and fees from preschool through 12th grade beginning in fall 2026.18Baptist News Global. Kamehameha Schools Gets Court Permission for Free Tuition The financial hit is small relative to the endowment: Kamehameha reported roughly $11.8 million in net tuition revenue the prior year and already subsidized more than 97% of the cost of educating each student.17Honolulu Civil Beat. Can Kamehameha Fend Off Admissions Lawsuit With Free Tuition A court-directed study noted the plan “is expected to provide important benefits with respect to the legal challenges to Pauahi’s mission.”
Threats and the Fight Over Plaintiff Anonymity
The suit generated intense backlash. SFFA reported 125 threats after the filing.19Hawaiʻi News Now. Kamehameha Schools Lawsuit Plaintiffs Seek Anonymity Amid Death Threats Lead attorney Franklin-Murdock said his home address was posted on social media and that he received a package containing what appeared to be feces, which he reported to the FBI.20Honolulu Civil Beat. The People Suing Kamehameha Schools Are Getting Death Threats Edward Blum said he received a “torrent of threats, harassment, and other abuse,” including suggestions he be assassinated, and removed his contact information from SFFA’s website.21U.S. News and World Report. Family Suing Kamehameha Schools Over Admissions Policy Are Getting Threats, Seek Anonymity
The two named plaintiffs, a mother and daughter from Kauai identified as B.P. and I.P., asked to proceed under initials. Kamehameha opposed the request, arguing the public had a “right to know” who was challenging the policy and that discovery required their identities.20Honolulu Civil Beat. The People Suing Kamehameha Schools Are Getting Death Threats On April 7, 2026, Judge Micah Smith granted temporary anonymity. He found the family had “not made a strong showing” of a reasonable fear of harm, but that Kamehameha’s argument for disclosure at this stage was “even weaker.” He ordered that the identities of both named and unnamed plaintiff families be given to Kamehameha’s attorneys under seal, with the question to be revisited during discovery.22Honolulu Civil Beat. Family Suing Kamehameha Schools Can Stay Anonymous for Now
Where the Case Stands
The case is before U.S. District Judge Micah Smith, who took over after Senior District Judge Leslie Kobayashi recused herself on October 21, 2025. On December 1, 2025, Smith certified to the U.S. Attorney General that the case raises a question about the constitutionality of § 1981, giving the federal government 60 days to consider intervening.2Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. SFFA v. Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop
Following a January 2026 status conference, the court directed Kamehameha to consolidate its anticipated motions to dismiss into one filing and signaled it would take up constitutional and statutory standing arguments first. A scheduling conference before a magistrate judge was continued to April 22, 2026.2Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse. SFFA v. Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop No trial date has been set.