What the Lawsuit Alleges
Kamehameha Schools is a well-endowed private school system in Hawaii, founded from the estate of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, whose 1884 will directed that the schools give preference to children of Native Hawaiian ancestry. The school has operated on that basis for over a century, with applications regularly exceeding available seats by as much as 17 to 1.
In October 2025, Students for Fair Admissions, a national group that previously challenged race-conscious admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina, sued Kamehameha Schools in federal court in Hawaii. The complaint alleges the school admissions policy functions as a near-total racial bar, since Native Hawaiian applicants are admitted first and the school works to ensure there are rarely leftover seats for other children, and argues this violates a federal civil rights law, Section 1981, which guarantees equal rights to make and enforce contracts regardless of race.
The Legal Theory and the School Response
The lawsuit legal theory centers on the idea that admission to Kamehameha, historically involving signed tuition and enrollment contracts, constitutes contracting, and that Section 1981 bars racial discrimination in that contracting relationship. The plaintiffs argue the school could preserve its Hawaiian-language and culture-based mission while using race-neutral admissions criteria instead.
Kamehameha Schools has stated it is resolved to vigorously defend its admissions policy, expressing confidence that the facts and the law are on its side. The school has successfully defended similar past challenges, including a set of cases in the 2000s where a panel initially ruled against the policy before a full appeals court upheld it, a case that reportedly ended in a confidential settlement with the family involved.
The Tuition-Elimination Announcement
In a striking development, in December 2025, just two months after the lawsuit was filed, Kamehameha Schools Board of Trustees announced that starting with the 2026-27 school year, the school would no longer charge tuition. The board framed the decision in cultural terms, describing a Kamehameha education as a gift rooted in the founding princess intent rather than a transactional exchange.
Legal observers have noted the timing is significant, since the lawsuit theory depends partly on tuition contracts as the basis for Section 1981 to apply, and eliminating tuition going forward could complicate that argument for future admissions cycles, even though the lawsuit also seeks damages for past years when tuition was charged. As of this update, the case remains in early stages, and Kamehameha Schools has not yet had a court rule on the merits of its admissions policy.
How to Get Legal Help
To follow any further developments, bookmark this page and subscribe to LawsuitWatch alerts.
Free Legal Evaluation
Do You Qualify to File a Claim?
Our network of verified plaintiff attorneys offers free, no-obligation case evaluations. Contingency fee representation means you pay nothing unless you win.
Kamehameha Schools Lawsuit: The Admissions Policy Challenge: Frequently Asked Questions
Answers to the most common questions about this case and your legal options.
What does the Kamehameha Schools lawsuit allege?
That the school policy of giving admissions preference to Native Hawaiian applicants functions as a near-total racial bar against other children, violating a federal civil rights law, Section 1981, which prohibits racial discrimination in contracting. The school has not conceded the claims.
Who filed the lawsuit?
Students for Fair Admissions, a national group previously known for challenging race-conscious college admissions policies at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.
How has Kamehameha Schools responded?
The school stated it is resolved to vigorously defend its admissions policy and expressed confidence in its legal position, noting it has successfully defended similar challenges in the past.
Why did the school eliminate tuition?
Kamehameha announced in December 2025 that it would stop charging tuition starting in 2026-27, framing it in cultural terms. Legal observers have noted this could affect the lawsuit theory, since the case relies partly on the existence of tuition contracts.
Has a court ruled on the case?
Not yet, as of this update. The case remains in early stages, and no court has ruled on the merits of the admissions policy.