Hawaii ballot measure · November 3, 2026
Hawaii Question 1, explained
More time for the Senate to act on judicial appointments. A ballot measure is a yes-or-no question put directly to voters — no candidate is involved, and the wording on the ballot is the wording that becomes law. This page shows that wording first, then what it actually changes.
The official wording
QUESTION #1: Increasing the Timeframe for the Hawaii Senate to Consider and Act on Judicial Appointments. Shall the Constitution of the State of Hawaii be amended to allow the Senate more time to consider and act on the appointments of justices and judges, by increasing the timeframe from thirty days to sixty days for appointments made between April 1 and December 31 when the senate is not in regular session or is about to adjourn the regular session?
This is what appears on the ballot. Everything below explains it.
What it actually means
In Hawaii the governor picks judges from a list prepared by the Judicial Selection Commission, and the Senate has 30 days to reject the choice — if it does nothing, the appointment is confirmed automatically. The Legislature usually adjourns in early May, so an appointment made over the summer or autumn forces senators back into a special session to beat that 30-day clock. This amendment would give the Senate 60 days instead of 30 for appointments made between April 1 and December 31.
If you vote YES
- For an appointment made between April 1 and December 31, the Senate would have 60 days rather than 30 to reject it before consent is presumed.
- The same 60-day window would apply to district court judges appointed by the chief justice, who are also confirmed by the Senate.
- Senators would have more room to schedule special sessions, and could group several appointments into one rather than convening for one or two.
- The 30-day window would still apply to appointments made in January, February and March, while the Legislature is in regular session.
If you vote NO
- The Senate would keep 30 days to act on every judicial appointment, whatever time of year it is made, and an appointment it does not reject in that time would continue to be deemed confirmed.
- Appointments made after the Legislature adjourns would continue to require a special session to be considered; Sen. Karl Rhoads reported each one costs about $5,000 in airfare and per diem for neighbour island senators, plus senator and staff time.
- The rest of the process would be unchanged: the Judicial Selection Commission's list, the governor's or chief justice's 30 days to appoint, 10 days to name a replacement after a rejection, and the commission's power to appoint without Senate consent if the process is exhausted.
The numbers that matter
- Cost of a Senate special session
- about $5,000
Airfare and per diem for neighbor island senators, as reported by Sen. Karl Rhoads for the Senate Judiciary Committee; excludes senator and staff time
Why supporters say YES
"Judicial appointments have been made throughout the year, including during the interim when the Senate is not in session, requiring the Senate to convene a special session to consider the appointments. Each special session costs approximately $5,000 for airfare and per diem for neighbor island senators… Accordingly, this measure will provide flexibility in the scheduling of special sessions and may reduce the number of special sessions."
— Sen. Karl Rhoads (D-13), reporting the Senate Judiciary Committee's findings
Why opponents say NO
"If the constitutional amendment proposed by this measure passes and is approved by voters, it could leave judicial vacancies unfilled for an extended period of time, depending on when a vacancy occurs. We would note that the current process of filling judicial vacancies is already time-intensive… This proposed change would prolong the period of vacancy for certain appointments thus delaying the onboarding of new justices and judges."
— Rodney A. Maile, administrative director of the courts, testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee; he stated that the Judiciary itself takes no position on the measure
What’s genuinely uncertain
- No committee has registered to support or oppose the amendment and no organised campaign exists on either side; the arguments above come from the legislative record.
- How many appointments fall in the April-to-December window in a typical year, and how many special sessions the change would actually save, has not been published.
- Because a blank vote counts against a Hawaii constitutional amendment, turnout and ballot fatigue affect the outcome as much as opinion on the merits.
The bottom line
Whether to trade a faster guarantee that judicial seats are filled for a Senate calendar that does not require a special session each time an appointment lands outside the regular session; the committee sponsoring it points to the cost and awkwardness of those sessions, the courts' administrative director notes vacancies could stay open longer.
One neutral sentence describing the tradeoff — not a recommendation.
Checking it against the official text
The Hawaii Office of Elections publishes the certified measures and, in most states, an official voter guide with fiscal notes. That is the authoritative version. Everything here is an explanation of it, not a substitute for it.
Confirm this with the official source
Your ballot is determined by your election authority, not by us. Verify your registration, precinct, and sample ballot at Hawaii Office of Elections.