LobbyComply Blog

The Hawaii Legislature has fundamentally changed the landscape for government contractors by enacting House Bill 412. Effective January 1, 2027, this law expands the definition of “lobbying” to include certain procurement activities. If your organization pursues state contracts, these changes may require you to register as a lobbyist even if you have never considered your activities to be traditional lobbying.

Understanding the New Definition of Lobbying

Previously, Hawaii law defined lobbying primarily as communicating with officials to influence legislative or executive action or ballot issues. Under the new provisions of HB 412, lobbying now includes:

• Financial Disclosure Personnel: Communications with any person required to file financial disclosure statements with the state regarding the following procurement matters.
  • Contract Solicitation and Awards: Any communication regarding the solicitation or award of a contract by proposal before an administrative agency.
  • Vendor Relationships: Discussions concerning potential future vendor relationships with an administrative agency.

It is important to note that the law specifically excludes communications that are initiated by a legislator or a state employee.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

The state has introduced significant penalties to ensure adherence to these transparency requirements. Any contract or action entered into by the state that is found to be in violation of lobbying laws may be voidable within 60 days after a violation is determined. The Attorney General, in coordination with the affected purchasing agency, holds the authority to enforce these penalties.

Determining If You Must Register

Not every vendor interaction will trigger a registration requirement. Registration is typically based on specific thresholds, including:

• The amount of compensation received for lobbying activities.
• The total time spent lobbying during a specific reporting period or calendar year.
• The total expenditures made toward lobbying efforts.

Frequently Asked Questions

When do these procurement lobbying changes actually take effect? While the bill was enacted on May 16, 2025, the expanded definition, specifically targeting procurement and vendor relationships, does not take effect until January 1, 2027. This provides organizations a window to assess their current business development strategies and internal compliance protocols.

Does this mean every sales meeting with a state agency is now “lobbying”? Not necessarily. The law focuses on communications concerning the “solicitation or award of a contract by proposal” or “potential future vendor relationships”. Standard administrative inquiries or communications initiated by the state employee are generally excluded. However, because the line between “sales” and “influence” is now thinner, a formal assessment of your activities is highly recommended.

How can I stay updated on these and other state compliance changes? Rules regarding procurement and lobbying are subject to frequent shifts. For in-house teams who need a reliable reference, our Guidebooks provide up-to-date regional data and statutory summaries. If your organization requires a more tailored approach to navigate these new Hawaii requirements, our Consulting team offers hands-on assistance to ensure your procurement efforts remain compliant and your contracts secure.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii recently ruled that a 2024 state law (Act 191) aimed at regulating deceptive election media is unconstitutional. In the case of The Babylon Bee, LLC and Dawn O’Brien v. Anne E. Lopez, et al., the court granted a permanent injunction against the law, finding that it violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments. While the state argued the law was necessary to protect electoral integrity from AI-generated “deepfakes,” the court determined the restrictions were too broad and lacked the narrow tailoring required by the Constitution.

Understanding Act 191 and the Court’s Ruling

Act 191 was designed to prevent the reckless distribution of “materially deceptive” election media. This included any video, audio, or images created via digital technology or artificial intelligence that depicted a candidate engaging in speech or conduct that did not actually happen. The law specifically targeted content intended to harm a candidate’s reputation or influence voter behavior from February through Election Day.

The court’s decision centered on several key legal principles:

• Content and Speaker Discrimination: The court found that Act 191 discriminated based on the content of the speech and the identity of the speaker.
• Failure of Strict Scrutiny: Even though protecting elections from deceptive media is a “compelling interest,” the law failed the strict scrutiny test because it was not narrowly tailored.
• Vagueness and Overbreadth: Under the Fourteenth Amendment, the law was ruled unconstitutionally vague because it required speakers to guess at the “risk” of their content rather than following clear, objective standards.
• Compelled Speech: The requirement to include a state-mandated disclaimer was found to impermissibly alter the intended message and effect of the political speech.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the court rule against a law meant to stop deceptive AI content?

While the state has a valid interest in protecting elections, the court found that Act 191 was “substantially overbroad”. Instead of focusing solely on clearly harmful misinformation, it created a system in which creators of political satire or commentary had to assess vague risks of “harming reputation” before publishing. The court noted that less restrictive methods, such as electoral literacy campaigns or existing defamation laws, could address these concerns without infringing on free speech.

Does this ruling mean all AI-generated political content is now unregulated?

No, this specific ruling applies to the enforcement of Hawaii’s Act 191. The court suggested that the state could use speech-neutral alternatives to combat deepfakes, such as targeted counter-speech or enforcement of laws related to actual harm or defamation, rather than broad preventive restrictions.

What was the issue with the disclaimer requirement in Act 191?

The court determined that forcing a speaker to use a specific disclaimer is a form of compelled speech. In the context of political satire or parody, such a disclaimer would fundamentally change the content and the message the creator intended to convey, which is a violation of First Amendment protections.

Gov. Green signed multiple bills related to lobbying. House Bill 413 clarifies lobbyist contributions are prohibited in periods during which both chambers are in session. House Bill 412 establishes certain presumptions regarding lobbying on behalf of private clients; makes contracts voidable when entered into in violation of the state lobbying law under certain conditions; and expands the definition of lobbying to include certain communications with government officials regarding procurement decisions. Senate Bill 289 establishes uniform provisions for the assessment of administrative penalties under the State Ethics Code and Lobbyist Law. House Bill 413 and Senate Bill 289 are effective immediately. House Bill 412 will take effect January 1, 2027.

The Hawaii Legislature adjourned sine die on May 2 after 60 days in session. During the session, lawmakers passed multiple bills related to lobbying. House Bill 413 clarifies lobbyist contributions are prohibited in periods during which both chambers are in session. House Bill 412 establishes certain presumptions regarding lobbying on behalf of private clients; makes contracts voidable when entered into in violation of the state lobbying law under certain conditions; and expands the definition of lobbying to include certain communications with government officials regarding procurement decisions. Senate Bill 289 establishes uniform provisions for the assessment of administrative penalties under the State Ethics Code and Lobbyist Law. If signed, House Bill 413 will take effect immediately and House Bill 412 will take effect January 1, 2027. Senate Bill 289 was signed by Gov. Green on April 11 and took effect upon its approval.

The third special session of the Hawaii Senate on judicial appointments adjourned sine die October 20.

The appointments considered were nominees Timothy E. Ho for District Court of the First Circuit; John Alberto Montalbano for District Family Court of the First Circuit; and James S. Kawashima for the Circuit Court of the First Circuit.

Lobbyists and lobbyist employers who engage in lobbying activities or who make expenditures for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative action considered during a special session must file a special report on or before November 19, covering the period from May 1 through October 20.

The Hawaii Senate convened a third special session on October 19 to consider and confirm judicial appointments.

The appointments being considered are nominees Timothy E. Ho for District Court of the First Circuit; John Alberto Montalbano for District Family Court of the First Circuit; and James S. Kawashima for the Circuit Court of the First Circuit.

Lobbyists and lobbyist employers who engage in lobbying activities or who make expenditures for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative action considered during a special session must file a special report within 30 days of adjournment sine die of the special session, covering the period from May 1 through adjournment sine die of the special session.

The adjournment date of the third special session has not yet been announced.

The Hawaii State Senate will convene a special session on June 20 to review judicial appointments.

Judicial appointments are for Jill M. Hasegawa and Joanna E. Sokolow to the District Family Court of the 3rd Circuit – Hawaii Island, and Gregory H. Meyers to the District Court of the 5th Circuit – Kauai.

The process will begin with a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, June 16 at 10:30 a.m.

Following the floor session on Monday, June 20 at 11 a.m., there will be a separate decision-making meeting of the Judiciary Committee at 11:30 a.m. Final Senate votes on the appointments are expected on Tuesday, June 21 at 10 a.m. This may affect lobbyist reporting.

A lobbyist and employer activity report must be filed if expenditures or contributions are made relating to legislative action considered during the special session.

Any such report would be due within 30 days of adjournment sine die of the special session covering the period from May 1 through the adjournment sine die date.

The Hawaii Legislature adjourned its regular session sine die May 5.

During the session, several bills related to campaign finance were introduced.

House Bill 1423, with its last action on March 18, was introduced but has not passed.

The bill set out to increase the fine for campaign spending law violations against a noncandidate committee making only independent expenditures and that has received at least one contribution of more than $10,000, or spent more than $10,000 in an election period.

House Bill 1423 would have allowed the campaign spending commission to order that the fine be up to three times the amount of the unlawful contribution or expenditure, and that the payment of the fine assessed against a noncandidate committee, or any portion thereof, be paid from the personal funds of an officer of the noncandidate committee.

This does not affect lobbyist reporting.

The Honolulu Ethics Commission is proposing to lower the permissible value of gifts to city employees from $200 to $25.

Commissioners chose not to pursue a recommendation to require gift disclosure forms.

The debate comes amid increased scrutiny over ethics rules after two former Hawaii legislators pleaded guilty to accepting thousands of dollars in bribes. Federal prosecutors brought charges of honest services wire fraud after ex-Senate Majority Leader J. Kalani English and ex-Rep. Ty Cullen failed to list the bribes on mandatory annual gift disclosures filed with the state.

The ethics commission plans to introduce its proposed legislation at the Honolulu City Council, giving council members the opportunity to review and possibly amend it.

The Hawaii Senate will convene for a third special session on October 28 to consider and confirm District and Circuit Court positions.

The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a videoconference hearing on October 27 to submit testimony. Decision-making will occur after the convening of the special session and after the measures for Circuit Court positions are formally referred to the Judiciary Committee.

The special session will only address six pending judicial appointments, including nominees for District Court of the Third Circuit, Circuit Court of the First Circuit, Circuit Court of the Second Circuit and of the Third Circuit.

Final Senate votes on the appointments are expected at 11 a.m. October 29.

A lobbyist and employer activity report must be filed if expenditures or contributions are made relating to legislative action considered during the special session. Any such report would be due within 30 days of adjournment sine die of the special session covering the period from May 1 through the adjournment sine die date.

A Senate bill in Hawaii passed affecting the reporting of electioneering communications.

Senate Bill 404 provides persons, including corporations, making expenditures for electioneering communications in an aggregate amount of $1,000 instead of $2,000 during any calendar year must file reports within 24 hours of each disclosure date.

The bill also exempts communications that are actual expenditures of an organization from being considered electioneering communications and excludes candidate and candidate committees from the disclosure requirements.

The information is effective and applicable for the 2022 primary election.

The Hawaii State Senate will convene a special session Tuesday, July 27 to review judicial appointments.

The special session will only address the judicial appointments of Dan Gluck to the Intermediate Court of Appeals and Lesley Maloian to the District Family Court of the First Circuit.

The Senate will convene in a floor session on Wednesday, July 28 at 10 a.m. followed by a separate decision-making meeting of the Judiciary Committee at 10:30 a.m.

Final Senate votes on the appointments are expected on Thursday, July 29 at 11 a.m.

A lobbyist and employer activity report must be filed if expenditures or contributions are made relating to legislative action considered during the special session. Any such report would be due within 30 days of adjournment sine die of the special session covering the period from May 1 through the adjournment sine die date.

The special session of the Hawaii Legislature adjourned sine die July 8, spanning a brief two days.

Lawmakers made several corrections to the state budget at the suggestion of Gov. David Ige and overrode six veto measures, including House Bill 53, the legal mechanism that authorizes the state government to borrow more than $1 billion in the next two fiscal years to fund construction projects.

The session end triggers a lobbyist and employer activity report due August 7, which is 30 days after adjournment sine die of the special session. The report will cover the period from May 1 through July 8 and applies to and includes only those expenditures and contributions relating to legislative action considered during the special session. Expenditures and contributions included in the report do not need to be included by the person filing the report in any subsequent statement of expenditures. 

Lawmakers will return to the Hawaii State Capitol on Tuesday, July 6 to consider overriding Gov. David Ige’s vetoes of measures the Legislature approved this year, and to make some necessary fixes to bills that deal with state finances.

Gov. Ige said he intends to veto 28 bills passed by his fellow Democrats, which is an unusually high number.

The governor is not required to veto all 28 bills and still has the option of signing some of them or allowing them to become law without his signature. That makes it difficult for lawmakers to precisely plan their response, since they do not know yet which measures Gov. Ige will finally reject.

The governor has until 11:59 p.m. on July 6 to veto measures passed this spring. If he takes no action by that date, the bills will then become law with or without his signature.

Gov. Ige has also said he needs amendments to some budget bills because lawmakers specified in the budget the state must use federal funds from the American Rescue Plan Act to repay more than $300 million in bond debt.

The federal government does not allow the state to use pandemic relief funding to pay down debt, and lawmakers will thus need to appropriate money from other sources to cover state borrowing.

That means lawmakers must approve a fix that will ensure the state meets its debt obligations. If the governor and the Legislature can agree on language that would accomplish that, lawmakers can approve an amendment with a simple majority next month without a veto override.

The special session affects lobbyist reporting. A lobbyist and employer activity report must be filed within 30 days of adjournment sine die of any special session covering the period from May 1 through adjournment sine die of the special session. The report applies to and includes only those expenditures and contributions relating to legislative action considered during the special session. Expenditures and contributions included in the report do not need to be included by the person filing the report in any subsequent statement of expenditures.