UPDATE for Hawaiian Kingdom v. Biden: Hawaiian Kingdom Files Motion to Appeal Judge Kobayashi’s Fourth Order to the Ninth Circuit

On July 12, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an Order dismissing the appeal of the Hawaiian Kingdom that came before a three-judge panel comprised of Justices Silverman, Callahan, and Collins. The Order stated that the Ninth Circuit Court “lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the challenged orders are not final or appealable.” The Court explained, “A district court order is…not appealable [§1291] unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or unless judgment is entered in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).”

The Hawaiian Kingdom v. Biden proceedings are still taking place at the district court in Hawai‘i, which is why the Ninth Circuit denied the appeal. While the Ninth Circuit was deliberating, District Court Judge Leslie Kobayashi issued a third Order granting the Federal Defendants’ motion to dismiss with prejudice because the case presents a political question. The basis for her third Order was the same regarding her previous two Orders that were before the Ninth Circuit. Without providing any supporting evidence that it is a political question, Judge Kobayashi stated:

Plaintiff bases its claims on the proposition that the Hawaiian Kingdom is a sovereign and independent state. However, “Hawaii is a state of the United States… The Ninth Circuit, this court, and Hawaii state courts have rejected arguments asserting Hawaiian sovereignty.” “‘[T]here is no factual (or legal) basis for concluding that the [Hawaiian] Kingdom exists as a state in accordance with recognized attributes of a state’s sovereign nature.’”

As such, Plaintiff’s claims are “patently without merit that the claim[s] require[] no meaningful consideration.” In any event, to the extent that Plaintiff’s ask the Court to declare that the Hawaiian Kingdom is a sovereign territory, the United States Supreme Court made clear over 130 years ago that “[w]ho is the sovereign, de jure or de facto, of a territory, is not a judicial, but a political, question, the determination of which by the legislative and executive departments of any government conclusively binds the judges….” “The political question doctrine excludes from judicial review those controversies which revolve around policy choices and value determinations constitutionally committed for resolution to the halls of Congress or the confines of the Executive Branch.” “This principle has always been upheld by” the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, and Plaintiff’s claims against the Federal Defendants must be dismissed.

On June 15, 2022, the Hawaiian Kingdom filed a motion for reconsideration with Judge Kobayashi. For the first time in these proceedings, the Hawaiian Kingdom, in its motion, addressed the Lorenzo principle and who actually has the burden of evidence and what needs to be proven. In State of Hawai‘i v. Lorenzo, the Intermediate Court of Appeals admitted that its “rationale is open to question in light of international” by placing the burden on the defendant to provide evidence of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s existence as a State.

If the court applied international law, which they admitted they didn’t but could, there is a presumption that the Hawaiian Kingdom, an established and recognized State in the nineteenth century, continues to exist until there is rebuttable evidence to the contrary. In other words, when you apply international law it is not an issue of whether the Hawaiian Kingdom exists as a State, but rather an issue that the Hawaiian Kingdom no longer exists as a State under international law.

You start off with the Hawaiian Kingdom’s continued existence until an opposing party provides evidence that the United States extinguished the existence of the Kingdom. There is no such evidence, which is why the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 1999 verified the Hawaiian Kingdom’s continued existence as a “State” in Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom.

It is clear that the federal court does apply the State of Hawai‘i v. Lorenzo case when defendants assert that the Hawaiian Kingdom continues to exist. In 2002, U.S. District Court Judge David Ezra, in United States v. Goo, stated:

Since the Intermediate Court of Appeals for the State of Hawaii’s decision in Hawaii v. Lorenzo, the courts in Hawaii have consistently adhered to the Lorenzo court’s statements that the Kingdom of Hawaii is not recognized as a sovereign state by either the United States or the State of Hawaii. See Lorenzosee also State of Hawaii v. French (stating that “presently there is no factual (or legal) basis for concluding that the [Hawaiian] Kingdom exists as a state in accordance with recognizing attributes of a state’s sovereign nature”) (quoting Lorenzo). This court sees no reason why it should not adhere to the Lorenzo principle.

In State of Hawai‘i v. Lorenzo, the Intermediate Court of Appeals explained, it “was incumbent on Defendant to present evidence supporting his claim. Lorenzo has presented no factual (or legal) basis for concluding that the Kingdom exists as a state in accordance with recognized attributes of a state’s sovereign nature.” Because Lorenzo presented no evidence is why his appeal was denied. Affirming the jurisdictional issue and the burden of providing evidence, the State of Hawai‘i Supreme Court, in State of Hawai‘i v. Armitage, explained:

Lorenzo held that, for jurisdictional purposes, should a defendant demonstrate a factual or legal basis that the [Hawaiian Kingdom] “exists as a state in accordance with recognized attributes of a state’s sovereign nature[,]” and that he or she is a citizen of that sovereign state, a defendant may be able to argue that the courts of the State of Hawai‘i lack jurisdiction over him or her.

The operative word in Judge Ezra’s decision, like the Intermediate Court of Appeals, is “presently” because of the evidentiary burden not being met. Regarding this burden to provide evidence, Judge Ezra stated, “that Defendant has failed to provide any viable legal or factual support for his claim that as a citizen of the Kingdom he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the courts.”

The Lorenzo principle was applied by the federal court in 17 cases since 1993 and was addressing the fact that the defendants in these cases provided no evidence of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s existence as a State. That is why the decisions had the word “presently,” because it is still an open question. Not one of these cases stated what Judge Kobayashi stated in her Order that the issue is a political question.

While the Hawaiian Kingdom did not have the burden to provide evidence of its continued existence as a State pursuant to the Lorenzo principle, it did so throughout these proceedings from the start. Whether or not who has the burden to provide evidence of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s continued existence or its non-existence, the outcome is the same regarding the jurisdiction of the State of Hawai‘i court or the federal court. Simply stated, if the Hawaiian Kingdom exists then the courts have no jurisdiction.

The Lorenzo principle is called federal common law, which Black’s Law dictionary defines as a “body of decisional law developed by the federal courts.” In 1938, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, stated that federal courts have to apply the laws and decisions of State courts where they reside. As Judge Ezra explained, the Lorenzo principle stems from the State of Hawai‘i Intermediate Court of Appeals in State of Hawai‘i v. Lorenzo.

No State of Hawai‘i court applying the precedent of State of Hawai‘i v. Lorenzo in their decisions or the 17 federal court decisions applying the Lorenzo principle stated that the issue presents a political question. Judge Kobayashi’s statement that the issue is a political question has no basis in fact or in law.

On July 28, 2022, Judge Kobayashi denied the Hawaiian Kingdom’s motion. In her fourth Order she stated, “Plaintiff’s Motion fails to identify any new material facts not previously available, an intervening change in law, or a manifest error of law or fact. Although Plaintiff argues there are manifest errors of law in the 6/9/22 Order, Plaintiff merely disagrees with the Court’s decision.” She sums it up that it’s merely a disagreement.

It is clear that Judge Kobayashi’s opinion that the Hawaiian Kingdom does not exist flies in the face of an evidentiary burden in the Lorenzo principle that has and continues to be applied by the State of Hawai‘i courts since 1994 and the federal court since 1993. This is not a mere disagreement between Judge Kobayashi and the Hawaiian Kingdom, but rather a complete disregard of 29 years of court decisions that when a party is claiming the Hawaiian Kingdom continues to exist it must provide evidence of a factual or legal basis. Her decision is a clear “manifest error of law.”

This past Friday, the Hawaiian Kingdom filed a motion to certify for interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit of a non-final order. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the Ninth Circuit Court can hear a non-final order if it involves a “controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion,” and “may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.”

The question of law and the difference of opinion would be the Lorenzo doctrine, which Judge Kobayashi acknowledged when she stated, “Plaintiff merely disagrees with the Court’s decision.” The issue that it “may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation,” is that the Hawaiian Kingdom could move for summary judgement because none of the Federal Defendants contested the allegations in the amended complaint. A summary judgment is a judgment entered by a court for one of the parties without going to trial.

There is a two-step process for a non-final Order to be taken up on appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court. First, Judge Kobayashi will have to first certify the appeal with an Order, and, second, the Hawaiian Kingdom will have to file that Order with the Ninth Circuit for their acceptance of the appeal. If Judge Kobayashi denies the certification, the Hawaiian Kingdom will appeal on this same subject when the case has come to a close. This filing of the appeal now is so that resources and money won’t be wasted by continuing the proceedings in the district court, especially when everything centers on the Lorenzo doctrine.

The issue before the federal court in Hawai‘i is no longer its status as an Article II Occupation Court, but rather the Lorenzo principle and the issue of the Hawaiian Kingdom continued existence as a State. The transformation of the federal court into an Article II Occupation Court is incidental to the Lorenzo principle and the application of international law.

29 thoughts on “UPDATE for Hawaiian Kingdom v. Biden: Hawaiian Kingdom Files Motion to Appeal Judge Kobayashi’s Fourth Order to the Ninth Circuit

  1. Irregardless of the apparent absence of a Hawaiian Monarchy and thus a Hawaiian Kingdom, is the fact that upon overthrowing the monarchy and destroying the kingdom, and usurping its power and authority, forbidding the people from speaking their own language or practicing their own religions beliefs, the Kingdom of Hawaii simply exists as an oppressed and decimated people under current overwhelming oppression, grave injuries and unfathomable injustices. Looking around and saying you don’t see any Hawaiian Kingdom so it mustn’t exist is itself another form of trickery, usurpation, injustice and injury. Be gone, then, from America, Kobayashi and all other non Hawaiians, and behold the mighty Hawaiian Kingdom alive and flourishing forevermore. Just because you murder the Emperor doesn’t mean the Chinese Kingdom ceases to exist. It exists as long as there are Chinese people, even if you take over China and call it the 51st American state. You’re just a temporary scourge and delusional abomination that won’t sit long on your throne of lies, deceit and treachery. Perhaps Kobayashi is insinuating that because she hasn’t been put beneath the mighty Pōhaku and merged with the mighty Koa that the Hawaiian Kingdom must not really exist, as that is the justice Hawaiian Law demands from their ilk. China and Russia need to be petitioned for international lawyers and an international tribunal to hold people like Kobayashi and her comedian clan responsible for the continual destruction and oppression of an entire Race and Nation.

    • The Kingdom belongs to the Chieftain who defends and raises it. Offspring of the traitorous Kamehameha have no claim over the Hawaiian Kingdom. The Kingdom belongs to the Hawaiian Warlord who claims the title of Ali’i Nui. Plain and simple.

      • The ancient Hawaiian promise made by the Great Hawaiian God Lono of His imminent Return to Hawaii is still yet to come, a prophecy yet to be fulfilled. You can fool some men, but not the Spirits, and definitely not the Gods. The Gods simply await for the Hawaiian people to call on them again. The Gods favor the bold and the mighty and the Brave who believe in Them. The Kingdom of Hawaii will return when Hawaiians remember their Gods, and call down the Favors of Heaven, and know that all Gods of the earth favor the Hawaiian people and their rightful land, and all Gods will have their vengeance on the usurpers who steal, lie, and destroy the Hawaiians in the name of the Iehowa God who guides Hawaiians, and shall bring forth Lono to answer the prayers of the Hawaiian people and their ancestors

      • Who is the Hawaiian WarLord? Who are your leaders? What have you ever done for Hawaii? Sound like a group of hoodlums who thinks the HK will have no way of defending themselves so you can march in like hoodlums to rule. We had enough of that with America. We not taking stupid anymore. Go play in your own sandbox.

        • Currently the only warlords are Schatz and Hirono imho!
          As long as they bringing in the bread, the Hawaiian nation is glad to accept the benefits and privileges Congress has prescribed under the annexation resolution while protesting the same administrative system established over their ancestors protest in their ancestral homelands. Truly, they are the only warlords.

    • Kobayashi just rather live and stay stuck in the matrix where she is a cog in their wheel. Sure she and the DA knows that the island of O’ahu in which her court sits is in the Hawaiian Islands but she must recognize it by federal definitions cause she is part of the administrative state established by Congress.

      • She acts like a puppet, are her hands really tied, or can she really not see the truth. The lorenzo “law” principle has to be reversed, it is wrong and unlawful.
        The Feds will do the best for them, they know they have to abide laby international law.The international Law of presumption shows the Hawaiian Kingdom is and Will continue until Evidence provided, not fed.opinion making us continue going to court, delays, double talking bubbles, expensive delays or denial can prove different. The true evidence is that
        we are beligerant ly
        occupyied, the buck stops here. These are tactics they been using, to drain our resources till we run out of money or give up, been happening for many years. If you can help out our regency with all the court cost, the delays and extorted money for every filing in thei occupiers court system.
        Lets kokua. Mahalo for the good education and hope.i look forward to all your manao.

        • She acts like a US citizen, but then again who in the “State of Hawaii” doesn’t? There is not one resident in the State of Hawaii except for aliens. As a Hawaii resident US citizen judge, she knows she is on the lele but I mean everyone has a social security…which seems to be preferred over self determination and nationality so it appears that everyone is okay with being a citizen of the federal government than to be a government less nation without allegiance to the federal government. Everyone is basically permitting Congress to float debts and liens in exchange for providing numerous privileges and benefits via the Federally constructed public trust established by Congress under the Admissions Act of 1959 that needless to say is their prescription for treating, not curing, their continual violations of international law. Congress has the entire nation under it’s thumb and everyone knows it but they only protest the trust issues when they could be speaking to the source from an identity not based in legal quicksand. Some Hawaiians instead of living without a social truly advocating from a firm truth for self government prefer to be “citizens of the Federal government.” Kitchens v. Steele, 1953.

          • Lopaka, you are either dreaming or on drugs to believe that the courts would rule any different just because people gave up their SSN. Just because you gave up your SSN doesn’t mean there is no more debt associated with that account. They are still floating that bond in commerce with or without you. Wake up.

    • In other words, Kobayashi rather live below the line in contract with the administrative state so she can only recognize legal fictions.

  2. `ONIPA’A, Dr. David Keanu Sai, you are a “torch” of/ for our Queen Lili’uokalani and King Kamehameha III, their Spirit is in YOU….IMUA!
    WE send our ALOHA and GOD’S BLESSINGS and GUIDANCE to you and the Council of Regency. ME KE ALOHA POINA`OLE! Uncle Francis, Aunty Cecelia, Cousin Ursula, Nephew Micheal and ALL the `OHANA in our country, the HAWAIIAN KINGDOM and abroad.

    • Kamehameha brought about the destruction of Hawaii. He is an enemy of all Hawaii, siding with the haole to destroy untold Hawaiians. He served as a means to simply bring Hawaii to its knees and hand over the Hawaiian Islands to his haole fanboys

    • That is a very precious heart felt to our warriors for the truth. Our former 1st Hawaiian Governor Waihee, mention Dr Sai had approached him in regard to the restoration of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

  3. The council of regency should really think about reaching out to the Chinese government and educate them about the history of Americas prolonged occupation here in Hawaii. America is trying to use the same game plan with Taiwan as it did with Hawaii.

      • We could take the next step though. The regency could start sending diplomats to china, india, Finland etc. All we need is an ally to bring the issue to the UN. We need to start making allies, we shouldn’t go at it alone.

        • Kaulana, like I told KR the timing is not right. Timing and the geopolitical landscape are important for success. When I say the timing is not right, I’m not talking only about the HK I am talking about our allies and potential allies. First let the battle for the new multipolar international order come to its conclusion. If that is successful, then the alternative to SWIFT will be implemented. When the nations of the world see a better and more beneficial alternative you will see more shifting of nations to the new system. At this point our allies can help without worrying about U.S. sanctions crashing their money and economy. In the meantime, the HK has to show our allies and the international community they exhausted all available remedies. So, the courts of the State of Hawaii and Federal Courts can play games all they want but it is on the record and the international community will clearly see a blatant disregard for the rule of law and the infliction of manifest error of law to our detriment.

    • The Chinese gave the world the wuhan posion that has kill in the billions. The Chinese is heavily involved with the TMT. No Chinese in Hawaii.They already own America and buying up their farmlands along with Gates. Geez KR where you been??? If the Americans gave up their guns, Chinese boots will be on the ground all across America, and Hawaii.

    • KR, I only addressed the first sentence of your statement but now I will address the second sentence of your statement. The game plan that the U.S. used in Hawaii was regime change. This puppet regime was supposed to sign a Treaty of Annexation, legally extinguishing the nation state of the Hawaiian Kingdom. They failed twice to get a Treaty. There is no Treaty. The game plan the U.S. is using in Taiwan is not regime change. They already have the Taiwanese government on their side. The game plan is looking more like giving formal recognition to Taiwan as independent from China. Once that is done then the U.S. and its Western allies can enter into military security agreements to fund and protect Taiwan. Taiwan will be used in a proxy war between the U.S. and China just like Ukraine is being used as a proxy against Russia. First big problem for the U.S. and its allies, Russia is going to win its special operations in Ukraine. Second big problem, China is going to attack Taiwan and reunite it before the U.S. can give its recognition. Reunification before the Chinese New Year. I hope I am wrong in my analysis, so they can use diplomacy, to avoid conflict but the U.S. keeps provoking China just like it did Russia. China is kind of busy right now to deal with our issue. MHO

  4. Exhausting administrative procedures are really exhausting but mahalo for the thorough explanation regarding the legal matters. Always good to know what lies ahead on this journey to justice.

    • In response to your comment about SSN. My whole point is Hawaiian nationals who are 3rd party beneficiaries of Hawaiian Kingdom treaties cannot be citizens of the Federal government at the same time. The contradiction is inherent and clear. Your point about them floating bonds after expatriation is without merit cause all aliens are required to provide their own Public Charge Bond to offset their effect on the public trust which also includes protections for aliens rights and benefits via treaties.
      We all know the number one Federal defense against any claim of lack of jurisdiction and/or Hawaiian nationality is the political question doctrine. Ashwander rules provides the basis upon which the political question doctrine can be used against any claims made against the Federal government. I believe it is the 6th clause that eliminates US citizens from that remedy as one who accepts the benefits. Thus, if you possess a SSN under the social security act which transmits benefits such as unemployment, etc. then you are accepting the benefits and privileges of the pillaging and plundering under the guise of US citizenship prescribed by Congress. Therefore, you cannot access the treaty benefits of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
      Before Hawaiians were subjects of power, now we are the objects of power which Congress knows they must suppress and satisfy! The nation has been buried alive under US trade and commerce and each individual must protect, defend and execute their commercial rights as well as their right to self determination. #RighteousConcepts

      • Lopaka, there you go again thinking the U.S. can make Hawaiian Subjects into U.S. citizens without a Treaty. If the Hawaiian Kingdom continues to exist because of the belligerent occupation and no Treaty of Annexation to extinguish it, then the same goes for its nationals. They can give you an SSN, NSS SNS or NSN it doesn’t matter the HK continues to exist and so does its subjects. On to the other topic, it’s obvious you don’t understand what’s going on with the SSN bonded account. What makes you think by giving up your SSN and providing your own bond makes them stop using the bond, they had previously provided for you. From the time you were born to the time you gave it up how many times has that account been charged? You probably had that SSN for almost your whole life, and did you ever bother to inspect your Individual Master File? Provide me with the initial steps, you took to take control of that bonded account in order to discharge all liabilities against that account to bring it back to zero and for them to stop using it. There are many steps but just the first four is what I am looking for.

      • Lopaka where are you? You haven’t provided the steps I requested to where you made sure you took control over the bonded account so you could discharge all the liabilities against it and prevent them from using it to create more debt.
        On the other issue of what you posted above “…Thus, if you possess a SSN under the social security act which transmits benefits such as unemployment, etc. then you are accepting the benefits and privileges of the pillaging and plundering under the guise of US citizenship prescribed by Congress. Therefore, you cannot access the treaty benefits of the Hawaiian Kingdom.
        What you said is bogus. Either way the U.S. is not going to let you access the Treaty benefits. Try going into a State of Hawaii or Hawaii Federal Court and dismiss a case such as this one by saying I gave up my SSN and I am a Hawaiian Subject accessing the Treaty benefits whereby only Hawaiian Kingdom Law is applied in the Hawaiian Kingdom so you must provide injunctive relief pursuant to that treaty. Never going happen brah, you are misleading. You are in the same boat as this case only without an SSN. Giving up you SSN will not give you access to Treaty benefits or have the U.S. apply the laws of occupation in the occupied Hawaiian Kingdom.

  5. ‘IT’S NEVER TOO LATE”, to EVERY Human Being–multi ethnic, whether you Aboriginal or Indigineous, whatever profession you have applied or the lifestyle you have chosen, the consequences, truthfully, YOU are RESPONSIBLE for! The Ninth Circuit applies the RULE of LAW, ….. “IN GOD WE TRUST”, for what country?

    • The USA, actually not legal when In or
      on Hawaii Kingdom soils as not on continental US. Their delusion made in their Congress in US, they concocted it with no support from the real Hawaiians nor treaty.They did have support of a self proclaimed provisional gov. a treasonous group of greedies.
      Us Congress has no power outside its own territory.Yet treaties of commerce and friendship made between HK and US, so how can they deny HK is. And many other goverment/countries have agreements since mid 1800’s. We allow no war ships to raise their weapons in our harbors.

    • Aunty C, I like your last sentence, especially the second part with the question. As for me I would ask the question in what God do they trust? If they do not judge in truth and law, then they practice lawlessness. Then we will know what God they serve. We will see if the Ninth Circuit applies the RULE OF LAW OR LAWLESSNESS. 2 Thessalonians 2:7-9 1 John 3: 4

Leave a Reply to KR Cancel reply