Sunday, July 1, 2018

Legal Support for Kanaka Maoli/Kanaka Hawaii Maoli - A Keeper



MAHALO NUI πŸ™ŒπŸΌπŸ™πŸΌ 2 our KINGDOM OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS HAWAIIAN JUDICIARY uncle Moses & KINGDOM OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS CLERK uncle Fredd of MOKU O KEAWE for drafting our papers & teaching us how to Appeal even though da courts saying we NO CAN
already 2 separate charges against us for Trespassing and Property Damages was DISMISSED in the Appellate Court for lack of JURISDICTION based on our JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENTS Citing U.S. CODE & CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS Relating to TREATIES, INTERNATIONALLY PROTECTED PERSONS under Geneva IV and FOREIGN RELATIONS
this is only 2 out of 8 cases we currently have goin against Mr.Money man, State, County and America
We expect the other cases & charges against us to be DISMISSED πŸ™ŒπŸΌπŸ€™πŸ½πŸ™πŸΌ


LikeShow more reactions
Comment
9 Comments
Comments
Kimberly Souza πŸ‘ŒπŸ’ͺπŸ™πŸ‘
Manage


LikeShow more reactions
Reply1d

LikeShow more reactions
Reply23h
Ruthann Caudill I don’t understand, Noa.
Manage


LikeShow more reactions
Reply21h
Ruthann Caudill Have your Uncles gotten you to Congress and your Sovereignty?
Manage


LikeShow more reactions
Reply21h
Amelia Gora Jocylnn Joyclynn Costa helped in getting 16 kanaka from being jailed.... this can also help all kanaka maoli/kanaka Hawaii maoli too... see http://iolani-theroyalhawk.blogspot.com/.../the-doctrine... and other posts for protective orders, etc.Manage
Ruthann Caudill Amelia, yes, you sent me that paperwork. I applaud you in your efforts. I believe that you are correct, and asked to see Noa’s paperwork to have a better understanding of what is going on and how I might be better informed in order to help.
Manage


Reply8hEdited
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua Noa, is this how your paperwork looks, also?
Manage


LikeShow more reactions
Reply3h
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua I am also concerned about your other charges. How may I or others help?
Manage


LikeShow more reactions
Reply3h
Boar Kelli-ua Ruthann Caudill Amelia Gora Jesse Steele in our Appellate Court JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT we cited U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS and U.S. CODE TITLE 18 Laws pertaining to TREATIES,INTERNATIONALLY PROTECTED PERSONS & FOREIGN OFFICIALS Da result is them Dismissing the charges brought against us for lack of Jurisdiction πŸ€™πŸ½πŸ™ŒπŸΌ
Manage


Like
Reply3h
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua OK so you cited US Constitutional Law (always make me happy), code US 18 (Civil Rights (Cover of Law which includes Judges), Treaties, etc.

No wonder they Dismissed. I wish I could have been there.

Manage


Reply2h
Boar Kelli-ua Ruthann Caudill yes we did wat u said Nd cited u.s. laws aunty. We cited all the u.s. Laws pertaining to TREATIES & INTERNATIONALLY PROTECTED PERSONS
Manage


Reply2h
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua I am sooooo proud of you!
Manage


Reply2h
Boar Kelli-ua Ruthann Caudill no b proud of me. Be proud of you and my uncles that thought us how to draft these papers in the Appellate Court πŸ™ŒπŸΌπŸ€™πŸ½πŸ™πŸΌ
Manage


Reply2h
Boar Kelli-ua Ruthann Caudill I’m jus a SOLDIER taking orders
Manage


Reply2h
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua nooooo. You are inspired.
Manage


Reply2h
Ruthann Caudill Remember Aunty Dawn. She is helping you, too.
Manage


Reply2hEdited
Jesse Steele Yessah! Uknowdat my Bradda! Boar Kelli-ua We better Kōnane players then them.. they think they got the upper hand.. but pono will prevail.. Mahalo Akua for giving us the opportunity to make positive changes for everyone... PōmaikaΚ»i iā Kākou! Aloha 2 eveyoneπŸ™πŸ½
Manage


Reply8h
Boar Kelli-ua Yessah u kno that my brudda we da PEOPLE can make it wrk
Manage


Reply3h
Ruthann Caudill Boar Kelli-ua you are bring about changes, Noa! I am soooo excited!
Manage


Reply2h
Ruthann Caudill I think though, that everything is covered under

HRS §1-1 Common law of the State; exceptions. The common law of England, as ascertained by English and American decisions, is declared to be the common law of the State of Hawaii in all cases, except as otherwise expressly provided by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or by the laws of the State, or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent, or established by Hawaiian usage; provided that no person shall be subject to criminal proceedings except as provided by the written laws of the United States or of the State. [L 1892, c 57, §5; am L 1903, c 32, §2; RL 1925, §1; RL 1935, §1; RL 1945, §1; RL 1955, §1-1; HRS §1-1]

Attorney General Opinions

Common-law authority establishes that governmental bodies possess inherent power to receive gifts to be used in implementing their functions. Att. Gen. Op. 92-4.

Law Journals and Reviews

Beach Access: A Public Right? 23 HBJ 65.
Native Hawaiian Cultural Practices Under Threat. I HBJ No. 13, at pg. 1.
On the Reception of the Common Law in the Hawaiian Islands. III HBJ No. 13, at pg. 87.
The Lum Court and Native Hawaiian Rights. 14 UH L. Rev. 377.
Pele Defense Fund v. Paty: Exacerbating the Inherent Conflict Between Hawaiian Native Tenant Access and Gathering Rights and Western Property Rights. 16 UH L. Rev. 207.
Public Access Shoreline Hawaii v. Hawaii County Planning Commission: The Affirmative Duty to Consider the Effect of Development on Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights. 16 UH L. Rev. 303.
The Reassertion of Native Hawaiian Gathering Rights Within The Context of Hawai‘i's Western System of Land Tenure. 17 UH L. Rev. 165.
Cultures in Conflict in Hawai‘i: The Law and Politics of Native Hawaiian Water Rights. 18 UH L. Rev. 71.
Customary Revolutions: The Law of Custom and the Conflict of Traditions in Hawai‘i. 20 UH L. Rev. 99.
The Backlash Against PASH: Legislative Attempts To Restrict Native Hawaiian Rights. 20 UH L. Rev. 321.
The Latest Take on Background Principles and the States' Law of Property After Lucas and Palazzolo. 24 UH L. Rev. 497.
Loko i‘a: A Legal Guide to the Restoration of Native Hawaiian Fishponds Within the Western Paradigm. 24 UH L. Rev. 657.
Wiping Out the Ban on Surfboards at Point Panic. 27 UH L. Rev. 303.
Biopiracy in Paradise?: Fulfilling the Legal Duty to Regulate Bioprospecting in Hawai‘i. 28 UH L. Rev. 387.
The Hawaiian Usage Exception to the Common Law: An Inoculation Against the Effects of Western Influence. 30 UH L. Rev. 319.
Public Beach Access: A Right for All? Opening the Gate to Iroquois Point Beach. 30 UH L. Rev. 495.
The "Hawaiianness" of Same-Sex Adoption. 30 UH L. Rev. 517.
Method is Irrelevant: Allowing Native Hawaiian Traditional and Customary Subsistence Fishing to Thrive. 32 UH L. Rev. 203 (2009).
William S. Richardson: Developing Hawai‘i's Lawyers and Shaping the Modern Hawai‘i Court System. 33 UH L. Rev. 33 (2010).
The Life of the Law is Perpetuated in Righteousness: The Jurisprudence of William S. Richardson. 33 UH L. Rev. 99 (2010).
The Moon Court, Land Use, and Property: A Survey of Hawai‘i Case Law 1993-2010. 33 UH L. Rev. 635 (2011).
Demolition of Native Rights and Self Determination: Act 55's Devastating Impact through the Development of Hawaii's Public Lands. 35 UH L. Rev. 297 (2013).

Case Notes

Generally.
As this section does not establish the supremacy of the 1840 Constitution over the current state constitution, or somehow render the documents concurrent, whether chapter 431 violated the 1840 Constitution was immaterial for purposes of defendant's conviction. 90 H. 130 (App.), 976 P.2d 444.
Article XII, §7 of the Hawaii constitution and/or this section do not authorize for native Hawaiian grandparents any more visitation rights than §571-46(7) and §571-46.3 authorize for all grandparents, native and non-native Hawaiian. 112 H. 113 (App.), 144 P.3d 561.

Background of statute; general principles.
Prior to 1893, common law (usually) or civil law, not contrary to Hawaiian law or usage, followed as reason and equity dictated (L 1847, p 5; cc 1859, §§14, 823). 2 H. 209; 3 H. 90, 95; 3 H. 106, 112; 5 H. 543; 6 H. 718, 725; 8 H. 77, 80; 13 H. 499, 505; 17 H. 393, 410; 27 H. 626; 27 H. 671, 674; 31 H. 661, 669, reh'g denied 31 H. 796; 41 H. 634; 45 H. 373, 383-84, 369 P.2d 96; 46 H. 425, 429, 380 P.2d 762.
Effective January 1, 1893, common law adopted "except as otherwise provided..., or fixed by Hawaiian judicial precedent, or established by Hawaiian usage...." Effect of Hawaiian judicial precedent: 10 H. 421, 436; 16 H. 294, 303; 20 H. 146, 149; 25 H. 701, 708; 27 H. 626, 628; 31 H. 661, 669, reh'g denied 31 H. 796; 38 H. 479, 481; 40 H. 92; 45 H. 373, 383-84, 369 P.2d 96; 46 H. 425, 429, 380 P.2d 762; 49 H. 273, 414 P.2d 925. Statute gives Hawaiian decisions "the force of a statute". 25 H. 701, 708; 42 H. 518, 525. Effect of Hawaiian usage: 10 H. 408 (conveyance by lessor); 10 H. 421, 436 (conveyanc

Manage


Reply7hEdited
Ruthann Caudill Again, my questions are about Sovereignty. Why is the Kingdom of Hawaii not considered a Sovereign People?
Manage


Reply7h


No comments:

Post a Comment