Do No Harm, an advocacy group based in Utah, has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship Program administered through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In the complaint, the group says the federal program is unconstitutional because it discriminates based on an applicant’s race and ethnicity, and it names the federal government as the defendant.
The scholarship program, created by Congress under the Native Hawaiian Health Care Act of 1988, was designed to put Native Hawaiian doctors and nurses to work in communities that are described as underserved in Hawaii. The program has provided financial assistance to more than 320 Native Hawaiians, according to reporting on the lawsuit, in exchange for recipients’ commitment to provide healthcare services for two to four years in rural island communities where many residents are Native Hawaiian.
In its challenge, Do No Harm argues that the program’s eligibility turns on whether an applicant is categorized as the “right” race, and it points to how the program defines Native Hawaiian eligibility. The complaint also says blood quantum plays no role in the eligibility determination, and it describes the comparison between people who are described as excluded for not being Native Hawaiian and people who are described as eligible on a small fraction of Native Hawaiian ancestry as inconsistent with the program’s stated medical premise. The group’s filing also argues that the idea patients benefit from having doctors of the same race is based on a medical theory it says has been “debunked.”
Do No Harm told the court it represents three individuals—identified in the lawsuit only as Members A, B and C—who applied for the scholarship and were rejected because, the complaint says, they were not Native Hawaiian. The complaint describes Member A as a white nursing student with disabilities who wanted to pursue government programs to “serve the needy far from home,” and it says she was barred from eligibility because none of her ancestors were Native Hawaiian. The filing says Members B and C are full-time medical students who were similarly rejected due to a lack of Native Hawaiian ancestry.
In response to the lawsuit, Papa Ola Lōkahi, the nonprofit that runs the program, issued a statement saying the organization “stands tall in the face of a challenge.” The nonprofit said the program’s purpose is to bolster Native Hawaiian healthcare workers in the islands who can provide “quality, culturally informed health services” to Native Hawaiians. In an interview, Papa Ola Lōkahi CEO Dr. Sheri-Ann Daniels said Native Hawaiians providing healthcare to other Native Hawaiians is about more than representation, describing it as tied to trust, honesty and being truly understood.
Daniels also said the suit is directed at the federal government, not at her organization, but that the program’s future now rests with a federal administration she described as hostile toward diversity, equity and inclusion. She said she has limited confidence Washington will mount what she characterized as a vigorous defense, adding that she believes the program’s supporters may need to “save ourselves” and be honest about what that means.
The lawsuit is the latest effort connected to a broader strategy by conservative legal and advocacy groups targeting race-conscious programs and institutions, according to the reporting. The story also describes Do No Harm’s involvement in other civil rights complaints and calls on multiple organizations, including Kaiser Permanente and Texas Tech University, alongside its request that the IRS investigate the American Medical Association for running a scholarship program that, the reporting says, gives preference to certain ethnic groups.
Do No Harm’s lawsuit sets up what the group says are stakes that extend beyond Hawaii’s program, describing the case as part of a possible effort to unwind other Native Hawaiian programs if the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs’ argument. The filing says the group seeks a change that would let the three represented applicants apply if the program is opened to anyone regardless of race, and Daniels said the organization is weighing whether it should intervene in the case while bracing for the possibility of broader impact.
For readers following how eligibility rules intersect with health care access, the lawsuit also highlights the constitutional question at the center of the dispute: whether a program created to strengthen a culturally informed healthcare workforce can lawfully require applicants to meet race- and ethnicity-based eligibility criteria.