In a decision announced July 2, U.S. District Judge Jill Otake ruled in favor of allowing Hawaii's mandatory quarantine for trans-Pacific travelers to stand in response to a lawsuit brought by Hawaii property owners.
In the ruling, Otake said the emergency mandate is reasonable during the public health crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
The challenge to the quarantine came from a group of Hawaii, California and Nevada residents who argued the quarantine violated their rights, including the right to travel freely within the country. The Nevada and California plaintiffs own property in Hawaii and said the quarantine prevented them from enjoying the residences and completing maintenance and upkeep.
The quarantine mandate, which applies to out-of-state travelers and Hawaii residents, does not prevent people from traveling and the plaintiffs "have elected not to travel -- whether to or from Hawaii -- because they do not want to be quarantined," Otake said in the ruling denying a request for a temporary restraining order.
Hawaii "imposed the quarantine to prevent the importation and spread of Covid-19 and to avoid overwhelming the health care system, which are compelling state interests," Otake said.
As of July 7, Hawaii's reported 1,053 confirmed cases and 19 deaths since the outbreak began, some of the lowest infection and death rates in the country. Meanwhile, Hawaii public health officials have estimated that without the quarantine, Hawaii would have registered 5,000 deaths in and 25,000 hospitalizations due to Covid-19.
Hawaii Gov. David Ige has announced that beginning Aug. 1, trans-Pacific travelers will be able to forgo the quarantine if they test negative prior to arrival.
"Although the right to travel within the United States is constitutionally protected, that does not mean that a temporary quarantine cannot be instituted in certain areas when evidence shows that unlimited travel there would directly and materially interfere with the safety and welfare of that area," Otake said in her decision.
'In the complaint, the plaintiffs argued there was "no emergency" in Hawaii or the United States and said the quarantine amounted to a "travel ban." The judge notes that the quarantine is not a ban, as the complaint alleged, but a process that everyone, Hawaii residents and visitors alike, must go through to enter the state.
"A deterrent is not the same as a violation of a protected right -- because they are not barred from entry and because both residents and nonresidents are treated equally," Otake said.
The lawsuit was supported by the Center for American Liberty, a nonprofit focused on defense of civil liberties that has filed numerous challenges to coronavirus-related emergency orders, including more than a half-dozen in California alone, none of which has been successful in resulting in a temporary restraining order.
"Governor Ige is depriving Hawaiians and those living on the mainland of their constitutional right to travel, due process and equal protection rights by mandating that everyone who comes to Hawaii be isolated in quarantine for 14 days," Harmeet Dhillon, CEO of the Center for American Liberty, said in a statement. "The governor has flagrantly disregarded the United States Constitution with 10 successive orders with seemingly no consideration of the constitutional limits of his powers."
In the opinion, the judge notes numerous times in which the plaintiffs and their representation cited the wrong legal provisions or precedents and failed to follow standard procedure.
"The desires of a few cannot override the community's interest in preserving its health and wellbeing," Otake said.