Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to raise minimum marriage age to 18 after survivor and advocacy testimony
Summary
House Bill 729 would raise the minimum marriage age to 18 with no parental or judicial exceptions. Survivors, advocacy organizations and state commissions urged passage; the committee advanced the bill with technical amendments and noted a recorded reservation.
The House Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs on Feb. 19, 2025, heard extensive testimony supporting House Bill 729, which would raise the minimum age to enter marriage from 16 to 18, eliminate parental and family‑court consent exceptions, and remove other provisions that allow minors to be married.
Survivor testimony and specialist organizations took center stage. Dre Fields of Unchained at Last, a survivor‑led nonprofit, told the committee, “Hawaii’s current law is dangerous,” and described how parental consent and judicial approval can enable coercion and trafficking. Fields cited state data and national studies, and said that “marriage before 18 is detrimental to the lives of girls.” Other witnesses included the Zonta Club of Hilo, the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, and several survivors who recounted coercion and long-term harm from early marriage.
Why it matters: HB 729 would close longstanding statutory exceptions that allow minors to marry with parental or judicial approval. Supporters said the change would remove a legal loophole that can be exploited by predators and would improve health, safety, and educational outcomes for minors. Witnesses cited a state 10‑year lookback showing 216 under‑age marriages during the period; advocates said the majority involved girls married to older men.
Committee action: The committee chair recommended advancing the measure with technical amendments; the recommendation was adopted with one recorded reservation by Representative Garcia.
Ending: Sponsors and advocates urged prompt final passage, arguing the bill is a cost‑free statutory fix that would protect children and close a known loophole; the committee moved the bill forward for further consideration and floor action.
