Dahlby’s article injected her voice into weighty discussions about Hawaiian sovereignty, which she acknowledges have been going on “[f]or many years,” without seeming to have a grasp on critical aspects of those debates. First, prefacing an article about Hawaiian independence with a quote from Senator Daniel Akaka, the author of the controversial nation-within-a-nation Akaka bill proposal, displayed great insensitivity to the nuanced, productive debates about the shape of self-governance, indigeneity, and settler colonialism in Hawaiʻi. Second, Dahlby relies exclusively on quotes from those who have elsewhere announced their support for the TMT without mention of the volume of commentary and response to those quoted assertions. How did these important facets of Hawaiian sovereignty discussions escape Dahlby? Perhaps it is because she is a latecomer to the Mauna Kea “bandwagon”—another vehicle (excuse the pun) for Dahlby’s criticism of the Kū Kiaʻi Mauna.