The Hawaii Supreme Court has ordered a new election for State Representative District 43 after a tie in the 2026 Republican primary raised significant concerns about the integrity of the election process. The court ruled that the tie-breaking method used was invalid and that irregularities in ballot counting left the election outcome uncertain. This ruling affects the candidates involved, Kristen K. Souza and Sheila Medeiros, as well as the voters in the district.
The case, Souza v. Nago (SCEC-26-0000598), stems from a primary election held on August 8, 2026, where both Souza and Medeiros received 842 votes each, resulting in a tie. According to Hawaii law, ties are resolved by drawing lots. However, the method used by Chief Election Officer Scott Nago—drawing names from plastic capsules in a basket—was called into question. The court found that the election officials had not properly accounted for two ballots that were mistakenly cast by voters from a different district, which could have impacted the final results.
The dispute began when Souza filed a contest against the election results on August 24, 2026, after discovering discrepancies in the ballot counts. The Office of Elections reported an overage of two ballots in Precinct 43-03, where more ballots were counted than voters credited as casting them. This raised doubts about the legitimacy of the tie and the subsequent drawing that declared Medeiros the winner.
The court's ruling highlighted three key findings: first, the two ballots from outside the district could affect the outcome of the tie; second, the method used to break the tie was not legally valid; and third, since no candidate was legitimately nominated, the primary election was not complete. The opinion, authored by Justice Eddins and joined by Acting Chief Justice McKenna, emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the election officials to demonstrate that the ballots were valid.
In the opinion, the court stated, "The two ballots in District 43 are more than enough. There is no math to do. A tie has no margin to argue about." The court further explained that the election officials failed to provide adequate evidence to confirm the legitimacy of the two ballots, which were cast by voters from District 40. The ruling underscored the importance of maintaining the integrity of the electoral process, particularly in a tie situation where every vote counts.
The impact of this ruling is significant for the voters in District 43, as it sets a precedent for how election ties are handled in the future. The decision reinforces the necessity for election officials to ensure that all ballots are properly accounted for and that the methods used to resolve ties are transparent and legally sound. This ruling may also prompt a review of election procedures in Hawaii to prevent similar issues from arising in future elections.
Moving forward, the court has ordered that a new election be held to determine the nominee for District 43. This decision allows voters to have their say in a fair and transparent election process, ensuring that their votes are counted and that the outcome reflects the will of the people.
The court emphasized that the right to vote is fundamental in a democratic society and that every effort must be made to protect that right. The ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of electoral integrity and the need for clear procedures in the event of discrepancies.
As of now, there is no indication that the ruling will be appealed, but the implications of this decision may influence future elections in Hawaii. The case highlights the critical role of election officials in maintaining the integrity of the electoral process and the importance of transparency in handling election-related disputes.