By Andrew Gomes
The Honolulu Star-Advertiser
HONOLULU — A new state law that went into effect Monday creates civil liabilities for being an extreme “Karen ” in Hawaii .
The new law allows for penalties of no less than $1, 000 plus legal fees against someone who is deemed through civil litigation to have called law enforcement on a person based on that person’s actual or perceived race, color, birthplace, age, religion, sex, gender expression or other protected class.
| SPECIAL REPORT: Training to survive: What officers say they really need
Act 259 stems from a bill that was introduced in January and didn’t attract much public testimony until a final hearing in March, when a surge took place that was bigger for opponents.
The Hawai ‘i Civil Rights Commission and the state Department of Law Enforcement are required under the new law to advise the public about it.
Marcus Kawatachi , executive director of the commission, which does not have an enforcement role under the new law, said in a statement that Act 259 is about upholding the fundamental rights and dignity of all people.
“Discriminatory reporting is a serious issue that can have devastating consequences for individuals and communities, ” he said.
DLE Director Mike Lambert said in a statement that any fraudulent reporting, which includes seeking law enforcement assistance with the intent to discriminate or otherwise cause harm to another based on a protected class, is contrary to the agency’s mission that includes standing for safety “with respect for all.”
Under Act 259, a lawsuit may be filed against anyone who knowingly causes a law enforcement officer to come to a location to contact another individual with the intent to harass or embarrass the individual, harm their reputation, or infringe upon their rights based on a protected class.
Three lawmakers who introduced the bill resulting in the law—Sens. Karl Rhoads (D, Nuuanu-Downtown-Iwilei ), Stanley Chang (D, Hawaii Kai-Kahala-Diamond Head ) and Chris Lee (D, Kailua-Waimanalo-Hawaii Kai )—declared in the preamble of Senate Bill 116 that vigilance of citizens can keep communities safe by reporting witnessed criminal conduct to law enforcement, but that summoning law enforcement in certain circumstances has been misused against people of protected classes without reason to suspect a crime was being committed.
The bill’s stated need, and the procedure for addressing it, was strongly debated in public testimony.
Abby Simmons, chair of the Democratic Party of Hawai ‘i’s Stonewall Caucus, said in written testimony for an initial Jan. 24 public hearing that baseless and discriminatory calls to police happen far too often and divert genuine emergency responses.
“We have seen cases nationwide where individuals are targeted for ‘living while Black, ’ ‘shopping while disabled, ’ or ‘being in public while transgender’, ” she said. “These incidents highlight the urgent need for legislation that protects individuals from being singled out simply for existing in public spaces.”
Some people accused of such targeting have come to be known as “Karens ” after instances, often of middle-aged white women, have been recorded on video and posted on social media, leading to the “Karen ” meme.
Victor Ramos called SB 116 “woke ” nonsense based on what he said was 33 years as a police officer without ever encountering a situation the bill aims to address.
“Where is your data that clearly indicate that this is an issue worthy of a bill?” he said in written testimony for the Jan. 24 hearing.
Relatively little, but mostly supportive, testimony was submitted for the first two of three hearings on the bill. However, during the bill’s final hearing before the House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee on March 11 , a lot more written testimony poured in with opponents outnumbering supporters 39 to 20.
Andrew Crossland, representing Hawaii Patriot Republicans, said the bill would invite abuse and division that threatens free speech and clogs state courts with lawsuits filed on baseless claims underpinned by provisions in the bill that trigger violations if a person feels harassed or embarrassed.
Crossland claimed that a similar law created five years ago in San Francisco , the CAREN Act (Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies ), led to a spike in lawsuits that cost taxpayers there over $1.2 million due to much litigation being dismissed as frivolous.
Crossland also said SB 116, if enacted, would deter good-faith reports of suspected illegal conduct, which he said occurred in some New York City neighborhoods after a similar law was created in 2018.
“We can address misuse of police smarter—without this heavy-handed mess, ” he said in written testimony.
David Nichols told lawmakers that the U.S. Constitution guarantees him freedom to express concerns that include reporting suspicious behavior, but that SB 116 if enacted could label an honest report as discriminatory based on someone else’s perception of his intent.
“It feels like a backdoor way to chill my speech, forcing me to second-guess every call I make to the police out of fear that it might lead to a lawsuit, ” Nichols said in written testimony.
Kathleen O’Dell, chair of the Hawai ‘i State LGBTQ + Commission , urged lawmakers to pass the bill because more accountability is needed for people who “weaponize ” law enforcement with malicious, discriminatory calls for police.
“Too often, individuals from historically marginalized groups, including mahu, LGBTQIA + individuals, Native Hawaiians, people of color, and persons with disabilities, are subjected to unjustified and discriminatory calls to law enforcement, ” she said in written testimony. “These calls not only endanger the individuals targeted but also strain community trust in law enforcement and perpetuate systemic discrimination.”
Lynn Robinson-Onderko of Ewa Beach also urged lawmakers to pass the bill. “This measure is one more step in the right direction to deter damage from discrimination against our most vulnerable community members, ” she said in written testimony for the House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs Committee .
The committee voted 8-2 to advance the bill to final House and Senate votes. The two committee members who voted against the bill were Reps. Diamond Garcia (R, Ewa - Kapolei ) and Garner Shimizu (R, Moanalua-Aliamanu-Foster Village ).
Shimizu told other committee members that he didn’t agree that a need for the proposed law exists. “I feel like we should just be able to get along, ” he said.
The committee chair, Rep. David Tarnas (D, Hawi -Waimea-Waikoloa ), said in response, “I sure wish we could be just getting along.”
On April 4 , the House voted 43-4 to pass the bill. Shimizu was one of four Republicans who voted for the bill, and had reconsidered his initial impression.
“I support the purpose of this bill and the desire to protect all people as special, created in God’s image, ” he said on the House floor. “Ideally, I pray for us to be blind in all aspects, and judge a person just by their actions and merit alone.”
Opposing votes in the House were cast by Reps. Garcia, David Alcos III (R, Ocean Pointe-Barbers Point ), Lauren Matsumoto (R, Mililani-Waipio Acres-Mililani Mauka ) and Elijah Pierick (R, Royal Kunia-Waipahu-Honouliuli ).
The final vote in the Senate was 23-2, with Republican members also split. Rep. Kurt Fevella (R, Ewa Beach-Ocean Pointe-Iroquois Point ) voted for the bill, while Reps. Brenton Awa (R, Kaneohe -Laie-Mokuleia ) and Samantha DeCorte (R, Nanakuli - Waianae - Makaha ) voted against it.
Gov. Josh Green on July 1 signed SB 116 with its Sept. 1 effective date.
© 2025 The Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Visit www.staradvertiser.com.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
