This blog is about Hawaii's status as an independent country under prolonged illegal occupation by the United States, and the history, culture, law & politics of the islands.

By Scott Crawford, Hana, Maui


Old Archives (Aug03-Oct09) Top 10
Hawaii Blogs

Sai v. Obama update – Appellee’s Reply

From Dr. Sai…

UPDATE: AUGUST 16, 2011 — On August 12, 2011, Appellees (Clinton, Gates and Willard) filed with the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit a Appellee’s Reply in Further Support of Their Motion for Summary Affirmance. Appellees are claiming that the Appellant (Dr. Keanu Sai) does not understand the political question doctrine. Appellant argues it is in fact the Appellees that do not understand the political question because they are using it to protect a “political decision” made in 1898 to annex the Hawaiian Islands. Appellee cannot use the court to protect a “political decision” that violated the Lili`uokalani assignment and call it a political question. Appellant’s case centers on the violation of the 1893 Lili`uokalani assignment and the tort injuries suffered as a result of the President not faithfully executing this sole-executive agreement. What the President did five years later 1898 to seized the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes during the Spanish-American War cannot be protected as argued by the Appellees, even if it affects the legal status of President Obama who cannot claim to be a natural born Citizen.

In the Appellees’ Motion for Summary Affirmance, they specifically seek protection of the “political decision” made in 1898, which is not a “law,” and try to influence the Appellate Court on the politics of the case. On page 9 of Appellees’ Motion they specifically state, “An ‘unusual need’ exists for adherence to the political decision to annex Hawaii in 1898. In the 113 years that have passed since that decision was made, Hawaii has become a firmly established part of the United States-a vital part of its political, economic, and military workings. Over one million Hawaiians live as United States citizens. Indeed, President Barack Obama’s status as a ‘natural born citizen’ derives from his birth in the State of Hawaii. See U.S. Const. Art. II, §1, cl. 4 (‘No person except a natural born Citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President’). Thus, the District Court correctly found an unusual need to adhere to a past political decision, rendering Appellant’s claims nonjusticiable.” This line of argument is not legal, but political, and how does a court of law define an “unusual need.” In other words, the Appellees are saying that Hawaii was kidnapped in 1898, but it was treated like it was adopted for 113 years. Now that the kidnapping has been discovered, the Appellate Court is being asked to close its eyes. Use of the term “unusual” is to say that there was an “unusual need” to kidnap Hawaii. The Appellees have placed the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a precarious position of whether to maintain the U.S. Constitution or violate it.

Fronting the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., is a sculpture of Lady Justice, who is blindfolded and holding a weighing scale. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, money, power, or weakness; blind justice and impartiality. The Appellate Court is a Court of Law and not a Court of Politics.

For more information on the federal lawsuit visit:

6 comments to Sai v. Obama update – Appellee’s Reply

  • Win808

    We will either see the Separation of Powers at its very best or the perpetuation of Supreme corruption since 1893!
    Can’t hide what happened anymore; the line not to be crossed has been clearly drawn!

    Well done Dr. Sai!!



  • WOW!
    Straight talk, straight logic, clarity. Dr. Sai gets the facts out in the open.

  • kekoa

    WOW! This stuff should be on reality TV. I can’t believe the the U.S. Attorneys admitted on record, violations of the executive agreements and international law was done because of an unusual need. Heck, in that case every invasion has an unusual need. This might work in your U.S. courts but not at an international venue, hint.

  • kaehu

    Im shocked at the response by the US attorney! I hope and pray the court rules using the proper application of law! Way to go Dr. Sai!

  • Rose Springer

    Very enlightening. I have visited Hawaii for many years and never understood this issue, but am beginning to. Some of my ancesters were Cherokee. I’ve recently learned a bit about that mess as well. It seems any time a People have something others want, it is taken by force or intentional deception. The justifications and excuses only add insult to injury. The truth can’t be changed; and it never stays hidden. Stay Strong. You are a beautiful People.

  • Eddie

    Thank you Dr. Sai for standing up for issues of injustice. Hawaii’s monarchy always tried to do right by their people but, along comes “John” with his pilau ways and he’s stll here.
    I am doing what little I can in my own court case. Go with God on your side.

Leave a Reply