Race-based Admissions Policies at Kamehameha Schools Encounter Fresh Legal Scrutiny in the Wake of the Post-Affirmative Action Period

Kamehameha Schools, a private educational organization with $15 billion in assets and established by the legacy of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, King Kamehameha I's great-granddaughter, is currently under threat of a lawsuit over its admissions policy that favors Native Hawaiian students. This admissions practice, in effect since 1884, has sparked debate for decades. Although intended to address inequalities and promote educational opportunities for Native Hawaiians, the policy is now being challenged by conservative organizations seeking to broaden the legal definition of racial discrimination in educational contexts.

Students for Fair Admissions, led by Edward Blum—the same activist who spearheaded the legal campaign that resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision eliminating affirmative action in college admissions—is leading the charge. The group has launched a website pledging to oppose Kamehameha's admissions criteria, arguing that it unfairly blocks non-Native Hawaiian applicants. “Admission for students who are not Native Hawaiian is nearly impossible at Kamehameha,” their website claims. Blum’s effort is part of a national push to overturn policies in education that take race into account, including scholarships and academic initiatives.

The preference given to Native Hawaiian students at Kamehameha Schools is deeply connected to its mission of uplifting Hawaii’s Indigenous people, who often experience higher rates of poverty and incarceration. The school’s board maintains the admissions policy is legally justified, referencing previous court decisions that have supported it. Notably, in 2006, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the policy served an appropriate remedial goal by confronting both economic and educational disadvantages. Alumni and community leaders who back the school argue that the policy is vital for maintaining Native Hawaiian culture and supporting a group that has endured long-standing marginalization.

The admissions preference has faced legal opposition before, such as in 2005 when a 9th Circuit panel initially rejected the policy, only for a later review to reverse that decision and allow it to continue. Kamehameha Schools has also resolved lawsuits through settlements, including a high-profile case involving a white student who was denied entry in 2003. In response to the current challenge, the school is expected to use similar legal arguments as before, stressing its compliance with civil rights laws and the role of the policy in correcting historical wrongs.

This issue has also attracted the attention of political leaders in Hawaii, such as Republican state senator Brenton Awa. Although not an alumnus of Kamehameha, Awa has labeled the campaign against the school’s policy as “racist,” asserting that it attacks a system meant to uplift Native Hawaiians. Awa and others have tried, unsuccessfully, to communicate directly with Blum. These actions underscore the significant political and cultural implications surrounding the debate on the school’s admissions standards.

For families like Kona Purdy’s, Kamehameha Schools represent more than an educational option—it is a transformative opportunity. After Purdy’s daughter was accepted, the family moved from Las Vegas back to Hawaii in 2021. Even when unstable housing forced them to leave Hawaii, they considered letting their daughter stay to continue at the school. The family returned in 2024, and Purdy shared his hope that the admissions policy remains unchanged so his daughter can apply for high school. His experience highlights the profound effects these policies have on Native Hawaiian families and their educational prospects.

Legal analysts believe the case may turn on judicial interpretation of the admissions policy’s reliance on race. Blum’s organization is expected to argue that the policy cannot withstand the strict constitutional standards now applied to race-based measures, whereas Kamehameha may defend it as a political classification, similar to federal policies that recognize Native American groups. The decision could become a landmark for how courts treat race-conscious admissions in K-12 schools in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling.