The forms of power of the two competing sides are quite distinct. U.H. arrives at the table with deep pockets - full of tax-payer money - well-educated anti-environmental attorneys and the prestige of institutions such as the University of California, Caltech, and the Smithsonian Institute.

The Hawaiians' claim is based on the bones of their ancestors in the ground and the power this represents for indigenous people around the world, who often find themselves in conflict with aggressive Western ways of domination and control of natural resources and native modes.

The opposition wants the project stopped until an adequate environmental impact study is done to determine the cumulative impact of decades of development on the summit. They demand that U.H. demonstrate that it is complying with eight specific legal criteria established by the law before it is issued a conservation district use permit. The burden of proof is upon U.H. - which according to the hearing officer's order - must also demonstrate how it plans to protect Hawaiian culture. The critics want the permit denied for various reasons, including the fact that U.H. must first provide a management plan.