The day after Kamehameha Schools settled a lawsuit over its Hawaiian-first admissions policies, a local lawyer who has been a vocal critic of native Hawaiian programs was seeking clients for a new discrimination lawsuit against the 120-year-old school.

On May 15, attorney David Rosen sent an e-mail to prominent Hawaiian rights opponents H. William Burgess and Richard Rowland saying he was looking for as many as 20 plaintiffs for an action the same as the John Doe v. Kamehameha lawsuit that was settled the day before on undisclosed terms.

Rowland sent out an e-mail on May 18 spreading the word, "David Rosen has asked our help with finding plaintiffs for his lawsuit. ... If you are interested, call him. If you know anyone else who might be interested, please forward this to them."

Doe v. Kamehameha, filed by a non-Hawaiian student denied admission to Kamehameha Schools in 2003, was settled — presumably for cash — on May 14 as the U.S. Supreme Court was deciding whether to review a ruling in Kamehameha's favor by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The settlement did not require the school to change its policy of giving admissions preference to native Hawaiians.

In his e-mail to Burgess and Rowland, Rosen said, "As we discussed, I am attempting to put together a group of plaintiffs to bring an action challenging Kamehameha Schools' race-based admissions policy. The lawsuit will be identical to the John Doe lawsuit that was recently settled. I hope to have a group of at least 10-20 plaintiffs prior to filing the lawsuit."

Rosen said the lawsuit would involve "absolutely no cost to the plaintiffs" and would be filed as a John and Jane Doe action to protect the confidentiality of his clients.

"Identities will be disclosed only to the presiding judge and possibly opposing counsel subject to a protective order," Rosen said. "Interested plaintiffs and/or their parents may contact me directly. I will not disclose their identity to anyone without their prior consent."

Rosen described an ideal plaintiff as such, "To be a plaintiff, a party must either be or have a school aged child (i.e., 4-16 years old), must live in Hawai'i, and must have the intent to attend the Kamehameha Schools if accepted. It may also be necessary to apply for admission to Kamehameha Schools, although this need not have been already done."

Rosen will almost certainly face questions from Kamehameha Schools attorneys about the propriety of soliciting clients who they'll argue had no personal grievance against the school until the lawyer encouraged them to make a claim.

Kamehameha lawyers will likely contend that promising anonymity and a free ride on legal costs makes it too easy for plaintiffs to sue frivolously for damages without facing the risks usually inherent in lawsuits.

Attorneys defending other civil rights cases against Hawaiian programs have used this issue to challenge whether the plaintiffs had suffered sufficient personal injury to have standing to sue.

Rosen disputes any notion that his efforts are more about money than principle in the wake of the Doe v. Kamehameha settlement reached by attorneys John Goemans and Eric Grant.

"I can assure you that my offer to represent children (and their parents) who want to be considered on an equal playing field and not discriminated against because of where their grandfathers' grandfathers' grandfathers were born is not about money," he said.

"Likewise, given the way that other plaintiffs and their attorneys have been treated in similar cases in Hawai'i, preserving the anonymity of any potential plaintiffs (i.e., young school-aged children and their families) in any future lawsuits is an unfortunate necessity to protect their physical safety."

David Shapiro, a veteran Hawai'i journalist, can be reached by e-mail at dave@volcanicash.net. Read his daily blog at blogs.honoluluadvertiser.com.