Hawaii Senate Panel Narrowly Approves Chief Justice Nominee Vladimir Devens in 3-2 Vote
Why It Matters
Hawaii’s judiciary is facing a leadership transition that has sparked debate over judicial transparency and the disclosure of political affiliations. The narrow approval of Associate Justice Vladimir Devens to serve as the state’s next chief justice raises questions about how candidates for the Hawaii Supreme Court are vetted — and whether existing application requirements adequately surface potential conflicts of interest.
The outcome has implications not just for the court’s leadership, but for public confidence in the independence of Hawaii’s third branch of government, which oversees everything from housing policy disputes to constitutional questions affecting residents statewide.
What Happened
The Hawaii Senate Judiciary Committee voted 3-2 on Friday to recommend consent for Governor Josh Green’s nominee, Associate Justice Vladimir Devens, to become the next chief justice of the Hawaii Supreme Court. Devens now awaits a final confirmation vote before the full Senate.
Committee Chair Karl Rhoads, a Democrat, voted against the nomination — a notable departure for a legislator who had approved all 69 previous judicial nominations he had considered. Rhoads called it “a sad day” and cited a lack of complete information from the nominee and official paperwork, stating that too many important facts had come to his attention through press reporting rather than through official disclosures.
Senator Joy San Buenaventura also voted against Devens, expressing concern that his undisclosed political ties were incompatible with the elevated responsibilities of the chief justice role. Senators Stanley Chang, Mike Gabbard, and Brenton Awa voted in favor of the nomination.
The Disclosure Controversy
At the center of the opposition was Devens’ failure to disclose his membership on the board of Be Change Now, a super PAC operated by Pacific Resource Partnership (PRP). PRP is a consortium representing the approximately 6,000-member Hawaii carpenters union and more than 250 contractors across the state. The organization is funded by the Hawaii Carpenters Market Recovery Program Fund and is actively involved in local political campaigns.
Rhoads indicated his no vote was the first time he felt a nominee had not provided sufficient transparency. “This is the first time where I felt like I wasn’t getting all the information needed to make my decision from the paperwork or the nominee themselves,” Rhoads said, according to remarks at the hearing. He added that he “reluctantly” recommended the committee withhold consent.
San Buenaventura acknowledged Devens’ qualifications as a labor attorney but argued that the chief justice role carries greater responsibility. “He is going to be chief justice in charge of the third branch of our government,” she said, “and with that kind of potentially undue influence when he, as a regular citizen, chose to be part of a PAC with such a negative character — I just can’t excuse that.”
Supporters Point to His Court Record
Senators who voted in favor of Devens pointed to his two-year record on the Hawaii Supreme Court as evidence of impartiality. Senator Chang noted that no testimony submitted during the process suggested Devens’ opinions or rulings had been anything other than independent.
Chang also highlighted Devens’ record in cases involving the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers — his former major client in private practice — as evidence that Devens was capable of ruling against his past associations. Chang further proposed that the Judicial Selection Commission update its application to require future candidates to disclose their political history.
Former Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald, who recently retired, offered support for Devens based on their two years working together. “I watched his decision-making during those two years,” Recktenwald said in public remarks. “I always thought that he called it like it was — straight-shooter.” Recktenwald expressed confidence that Devens would “do the right thing” as chief justice.
By the Numbers
- 3-2: Committee vote in favor of Devens’ nomination
- 69: Previous judicial nominations Chair Rhoads had approved before this one
- 70th: Devens’ nomination — the first Rhoads voted against
- 6,000+: Members of the Hawaii carpenters union affiliated with PRP
- 250+: Contractors statewide involved in the PRP consortium
Zoom Out
Debates over judicial transparency and political ties are not unique to Hawaii. Across the country, state supreme court nominations have drawn scrutiny over nominees’ past affiliations with political organizations, labor groups, and campaign finance entities. The question of how much prior political involvement disqualifies — or merely complicates — a candidate’s path to high judicial office is an ongoing tension in states where gubernatorial appointments require legislative confirmation.
Hawaii’s experience could prompt other states to revisit how judicial selection commissions screen applicants, particularly regarding involvement with politically active organizations that may later appear before the courts.
What’s Next
Vladimir Devens’ nomination now moves to the full Hawaii Senate for a final confirmation vote. If the Senate consents, Devens will succeed retiring Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald at the helm of the Hawaii Supreme Court. Senator Chang has called for the Judicial Selection Commission to amend its application process to require fuller disclosure of political histories from all future judicial candidates, a reform that could shape how nominees are evaluated going forward.