Printed in Public Forum,
Hawaii Island Journal,
P.O. Box 7179
Ocean View 96737
HAWAII, USA
tel: (808) 928-6449
fax: (808) 939-8107
email: publishers@hawaiijournal.com
February 16-29, 2000 A.D.
page 4
Dear Editor,
The rampant ignorance of the U.S. Constitution
reared its ugly head, once again, in two separate
articles in your January 16-31, 2000, issue.
In a nutshell, Bob Stauffer parrots the
ambiguous wording from section 1 of the
so-called 14th amendment ….
In 1968, the Utah Supreme Court recited
proved facts, with one unavoidable conclusion:
that amendment [sic] was never properly approved
and adopted.
See Dyett v. Turner on the Internet
or any good law library ….
Then Stauffer argues that certain, admittedly
unconstitutional rules prohibit the native community
from seeking official nation status.
He errs two more times.
The First Amendment guarantees the Right
to petition government, in the Petition Clause.
Moreover, an unconstitutional rule is not a rule
of any kind, and never was.
An Act’s unconstitutionality dates from
the moment of enactment, not from any
correct decision so branding it.
Bob, do your homework, please.
Leslie Lang’s interview with Robert
Keli’iho’omalu begins with a title that
mentions the “Law of the Land,” then
completely ignores the Supremacy Clause
in the U.S. Constitution (see Article VI).
Perhaps a return to basics is in order here:
Either Hawai’i was lawfully admitted to the Union,
or it was not. If it
was, then the Supremacy
Clause governs, and Hawai’i is on an equal
footing with all other Union States,
notwithstanding some discriminatory rules
that are demonstrably unconstitutional.
Equal protection of that Law is every American’s
fundamental Right, here and now.
If Hawai’i was not lawfully admitted to
the Union, then secession is not even a legal
possibility, or necessity, because these
Islands are not a Union State. Period.
Sorry to be so blunt, but …
lex non cogit impossibilia
law does not contemplate impossibilities,
ever!
But, here’s the rub:
Don’t expect any judicial courts to proceed
this logically.
All federal judges are presently subject
to the undue influence of the IRS, contrary
to Article III’s prohibition against diminishing
their pay with income taxes.
See Evans v. Gore and Lord v. Kelley,
also on the Internet.
Read the cases!
In other words, don’t go to any federal courts
for justice, certainly not before the IRS
is dismantled forever.
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Ocean View, Hawaii
[Editors of Hawaii Island Journal refused to
correct several typographical errors which
were printed with this Letter. Those errors
have been corrected above. Webmaster]