Rice v. Cayetano

Summary

In this dissenting opinion, Justice Stevens argues that Hawaii's Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) trustee election scheme, which limits voting to descendants of aboriginal Hawaiians, does not violate the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. He contends that the federal government has a plenary power and trust relationship with indigenous peoples, including native Hawaiians, and that such classifications are rationally tied to Congress' unique obligations. Justice Ginsburg dissents for the reasons stated by Justice Stevens in Part II. Justice Breyer concurrences in the result but rejects the majority's reliance on the quasi-sovereign concept.