Honoring Former Hawaii Justice Masaji Marumoto’s Legacy on the Bench

Justice Masaji Marumoto, appointed to Hawaii’s high court in 1956, was the first Asian American to sit on a state or territorial high court of the United States, paving the way for greater representation of Asian Americans within the judiciary. His groundbreaking role demonstrated the importance of diverse voices in shaping equitable laws and judicial practices.

This Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Heritage Month, we’re celebrating Marumoto’s legacy and the historic contributions of AANHPI individuals across state judiciaries, while acknowledging the long road ahead to equal representation. By reflecting on Marumoto’s career, we remember the ways in which the law has been used as a weapon against the community — and the great perseverance the community has shown in the wake of these injustices.

A Legal Foundation of Exclusion

Marumoto’s journey to the bench was built upon the struggles of generations who confronted systemic exclusion embedded within American law. From the first federal naturalization statute in 1790, which limited citizenship to “free White persons,” Asian immigrants were classified as “aliens ineligible for citizenship.” Congress hardened that barrier with the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the first federal law to ban a specific ethnic group from entry and naturalization. The statute’s reach was long: In 1890, California’s high court invoked it to deny bar admission to Columbia Law graduate Hong Yen Chang. (The same court finally admitted him posthumously in 2015.) Immigration restrictions continued to tighten against individuals of Asian descent through laws passed in 1917 and 1924.

Judicial decisions further entrenched these exclusionary laws. For example, the 1854 California Supreme Court ruling in People v. Hall deemed testimonies from Asians and other people of color inadmissible against white defendants.

A Pioneer on the Bench

Born in Honolulu in 1906, Marumoto grew up navigating plantation‑era prejudice and the promise of an emerging multiethnic Hawaii. After earning a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from the University of Chicago, Marumoto became the first Asian American graduate of Harvard Law School. He then returned home to open a law practice at a time when many mainland firms hired only white attorneys.

In May 1940, as tensions between the United States and Japan escalated, Marumoto met FBI Special Agent Robert Shivers at a social event. Recognizing Marumoto’s insight into the Japanese American community, Shivers enlisted his help in understanding community dynamics on the eve of Pearl Harbor. Once war erupted, Marumoto chaired the civilian Emergency Service Committee, steering nearly 160,000 residents through curfews, blackout rules, and property freezes.

Although he volunteered to join the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, Marumoto was unable to serve due to a congenital clubfoot. Instead, he taught at the Military Intelligence Service Language School in Minnesota, training Japanese-language intelligence officers. In May 1945, he was deployed to Okinawa to help establish a government there and later served in Korea before leaving the military in 1946. That same year, he became the first president of the Military Intelligence Service Veterans Club in Hawaii. Marumoto later joined the Judge Advocate General’s Corps and helped train Japanese‑language intelligence officers.

Marumoto broke additional ground after WWII: In 1954 he became the first Japanese American to be elected president of the Hawaii Bar Association and, two years later, President Dwight Eisenhower appointed him to the Supreme Court of the Territory of Hawaii, making him the first Asian American to sit on a state or territorial high court.

Marumoto left the court in 1960 and re-opened his private practice with his son, Wendell. He remained there until Hawaii Gov. John A. Burns appointed him back to the bench in 1967, seven years after statehood, where he served until 1973. When he rejoined the court, another Japanese American justice, Wilfred Tsukiyama, was chief — the first Asian American to lead any U.S. state supreme court. Together, Marumoto and Tsukiyama’s tenures redefined public expectations of who could dispense justice in America.

Beyond his judicial duties, Marumoto was a leading advocate for Hawaii’s statehood and played a key role in organizing the Japan-America Society of Honolulu in 1976, serving two terms as its president. In recognition of his contributions, he received an honorary doctorate from the University of Hawaii at Mānoa in 1985.

Marumoto wrote extensively about his experiences in the army and about the lives of Japanese people in Hawaii. He frequently wrote letters to his wife and his son, many of which were later published posthumously by his daughter, Claire, and UCLA professor Dennis M. Ogawa.

A Long Road Ahead

Recent polling underscores why representation matters — and why stories like Marumoto’s need to be uplifted as an integral part of this nation’s history.

Judicial diversity helps ensure the bench reflects the communities it serves, in experiences, perspectives, and identities. Research has consistently demonstrated that judges’ identities and life experiences can have an impact on judicial decision-making. For instance, one study found that judges with experience as public defenders generally issue milder sentences. And in sex discrimination cases, women judges are about 15 percent more likely to rule in favor of the claimant as their male counterparts, even when accounting for age and political ideology.

But judicial diversity is not about predicting or influencing judicial outcomes or reducing judicial decision-making to stereotypes about an individual’s identity. It’s about strengthening group decision-making, promoting public confidence, and safeguarding our legal systems against systemic and implicit biases.

Unfortunately, misconceptions and biases persist. The Asian American Foundation’s 2025 STAAUS Index reported that 40 percent of Americans believe Asian Americans are “more loyal” to their ancestral homelands, and more than one‑quarter consider Chinese Americans a threat to the United States. Underlying this distrust is the "perpetual foreigner” or “forever foreigner” stereotype, in which Americans of Asian descent are seen as outsiders regardless of how many generations they have lived in the United States.

Asian Americans’ exclusion is reinforced by the nation’s legal history. The treatment of Asian Americans as proxies for foreign countries — including the incarceration of Japanese Americans after World War II, the 1982 murder of Vincent Chin over perceived loss of access to jobs, the backlash against Muslim and South Asian communities after the September 11 terrorist attacks, and the spike in anti-Asian discrimination following the Covid-19 outbreak — illustrates how such harmful tropes have continued to fuel discrimination.

Today, more than 50 years after Marumoto stepped down, 42 states currently have no Asian American justices on their highest courts. An Alliance for Justice report finds that 41 states have never seated a justice of Asian American descent. Off the bench, Asian American and Pacific Islander attorneys remain underrepresented in leadership roles across bar associations, law faculties, and major law firm partnerships. (A 2022 report from the American Bar Foundation and National Asian Pacific American Bar Association found, for instance, that although Asian Americans make up the largest minority group in major law firms, they also experience the highest attrition and have the lowest ratio of partners to associates.) Broadening visibility at every rung of the profession not only enlarges the pool for future judgeships but also signals to the public that the justice system values the full spectrum of American experience.

• • •

Marumoto’s rise to the bench stands out both as a personal achievement and a powerful rebuttal to the notion that Asian Americans do not belong at the heart of American public life. His career pushes back against the very narratives that continue to marginalize, offering a different story — one of leadership, service, and deep civic commitment.

Zoe Merriman is the production coordinator for State Court Report.

Chihiro Isozaki is a counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.

Suggested Citation: Zoe Merriman & Chihiro Isozaki, Honoring Former Hawaii Justice Masaji Marumoto’s Legacy on the Bench, Sᴛᴀᴛᴇ Cᴏᴜʀᴛ Rᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (May 19, 2025), https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/honoring-former-hawaii-justice-masaji-marumotos-legacy-bench