Hawaii v. Gordon

Background

Hawaii sued the Director of the Bureau of the Budget after the President authorized him to act on whether lands retained by the United States under the Hawaii Statehood Act should be returned to the State. The Director, relying on an Attorney General opinion, told federal agencies that the Act does not cover lands the United States acquired by purchase, condemnation, or gift. Hawaii asked the Court to order the Director to withdraw that advice, decide whether a specific 203 acres obtained by condemnation were still needed, and, if not, convey it to the State.

Reasoning

The Court said the requested order would force official federal action, affect how federal agencies administer property, and determine the disposition of land the opinion states belongs to the United States. Because the practical effect of the requested relief would run against the federal government, the suit is treated as a suit against the United States itself. The Court applied the long-standing rule that a suit nominally against an officer cannot proceed if it would operate against the sovereign and the United States has not consented to such a suit. The Court therefore dismissed the complaint.

Real world impact

As a result, Hawaii cannot press this particular court action to compel transfer of the 203 acres; the dismissal prevents immediate judicial relief unless the United States consents or another legal route is available. The decision leaves federal control over property obtained by condemnation intact in this case and ends this particular effort to compel a conveyance.