Section 2.  The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

     In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.  In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

     The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

 

Law Journals and Reviews

 

  The Judicial Improvements Act of 1990:  Historic Changes in Federal Civil Procedure Aimed at Improving the Efficiency of Federal Courts and Reducing the Uncertainty and Cost Associated with Federal Litigation.  23 HBJ 41.

  Hawaii's Thousand Friends v. Anderson:  Standing to Challenge Governmental Actions.  12 UH L. Rev. 435.

  Evolution of the Act of State Doctrine:  W.S. Kirkpatrick Corp. v. Environmental Tectonics Corp. and Beyond.  13 UH L. Rev. 687.

  Hawai`i's Justiciability Doctrine.  26 UH L. Rev. 537.

 

Case Notes

 

  Standing of various taxpayers to challenge alleged unconstitutionality of OHA programs.  741 F.2d 1169.

  Case or controversy requirement satisfied by cloud on title created by litigation and language of court decisions.  753 F.2d 1468.

  Native Hawaiian group had standing to bring injunctive action for violation of Admission Act.  764 F.2d 623.

  Alleged past mistreatment of litigant, by itself, was insufficient to demonstrate likelihood of future deprivations for purposes of meeting case or controversy requirement.  961 F.2d 852.

  Congress had power through "arising under" clause to enact alien tort statute.  978 F.2d 493.

  District courts have original jurisdiction under Alien Tort Act for suit by alien for wrongful death, committed by military intelligence officials through torture prohibited by the law of nations.  25 F.3d 1467.

  Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act does not apply when action is against estate of an individual foreign official whose actions were outside the official's scope of authority.  25 F.3d 1467.

  Plaintiffs, Hawai‘i medicaid recipients who suffered from tobacco-related illnesses, had standing in suit against state officials, where plaintiffs alleged that the officials violated and continued to violate federal disbursement rules for medicaid recovery.  311 F.3d 929.

  Plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the restriction on office of Hawaiian affairs trustee appointments to Hawaiians, because plaintiffs neither alleged nor provided evidence of any injury related to the appointment process.  314 F.3d 1091.

  Appellant lacked standing to challenge (1) office of Hawaiian affairs business loan program where appellant failed to demonstrate an injury in fact; and (2) native Hawaiian eligibility requirement for Hawaiian homestead leases because appellant's injury was not redressable.  342 F.3d 934.

  Appellant who contended, among other things, injury by the provisions of article XII of the state constitution and chapter 10 personally subjecting appellant to racial classification, lacked standing as appellant did not suffer an injury in fact. 342 F.3d 934.

  Standing of plaintiffs who alleged that various state programs preferentially treated persons of Hawaiian ancestry in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, the terms of a public land trust, etc., discussed; among other things, plaintiffs had standing as state taxpayers to challenge the appropriation of state revenue to the office of Hawaiian affairs, i.e., claims limited to revenue that derived directly from taxes.  423 F.3d 954.

  Statute authorizing search and seizure of psychiatrist's records inflicts "injury in fact" which satisfies case or controversy requirement.  481 F. Supp. 1028.

  Case or controversy presented.  588 F. Supp. 889; 590 F. Supp. 778.

  No standing to sue for price-fixing and monopoly since no showing that alleged price-fixing caused injury.  606 F. Supp. 584.

  Whether liability coverage existed was case or controversy even before insured's liability determined.  608 F. Supp. 383.

  No alienage jurisdiction where aliens on both sides of litigation.  778 F. Supp. 1535.

  No case or controversy where plaintiffs not threatened with nor subject to application of Hawaii employment discrimination statute, chapter 378.  800 F. Supp. 882.

  Plaintiff had no standing to bring Truth in Lending Act claims unless plaintiff could show claims were exempt from bankruptcy estate or abandoned by bankruptcy trustee.  949 F. Supp. 1447.

  Requests for injunctive and declaratory relief rendered moot by the cessation of the disputed low-frequency active sonar research and the expiration of the subject permit.  14 F. Supp. 2d 1198.

  Plaintiff did not have standing to bring lawsuit, where plaintiff asserted mishandling of annual social security trust funds from 1960-1996, by improperly allowing social security trust funds to be spent for deficit reduction.  37 F. Supp. 2d 1176.

  Plaintiff was without standing, where plaintiff sought to enjoin State and city and county of Honolulu from implementation or enforcement of any and all state statutes and city ordinances that might apply to the business that plaintiff claimed to be developing, involving a commercial boating activity on the Ala Wai canal.  57 F. Supp. 2d 1028.

  Plaintiff, disabled individual who required a wheelchair to gain mobility, met constitutional minimum of Article III standing to seek injunctive relief for alleged Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 violations plaintiff encountered at fast food franchised restaurant and had standing to sue for injunctive relief for barriers not initially encountered; plaintiff's claims not specifically related to nonmobility denied due to lack of standing.  96 F. Supp. 2d 1065.

  Department of education's appeal of hearing officer's award of compensatory education moot; student had already received award of three months of compensatory education and had already graduated from high school.  127 F. Supp. 2d 1103.

  Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's appeal of plaintiff's claim for compensatory education granted, where appeal of hearing officer's award moot; among other things, plaintiff had received a high school diploma.  127 F. Supp. 2d 1117.

  Defendants' issuance of supplemental environmental assessment for routine training at Makua Military Reservation and PFC Pililaau Range Complex (SEA) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) constituted a final agency action ripe for judicial review at commencement of litigation under Administrative Procedure Act; plaintiff's claims had not been rendered moot by defendants' voluntary withdrawal of SEA and FONSI.  136 F. Supp. 2d 1155.

  Plaintiff challenging constitutionality of article XII of state constitution insofar as it created Hawaiian Homes Commission and office of Hawaiian affairs and established native Hawaiian gathering rights, lacked standing, where, inter alia, as to OHA's programs, plaintiff had not suffered injury-in-fact.  188 F. Supp. 2d 1219.

  Plaintiff challenging constitutionality of article XII, §§5 and 6 of state constitution and chapter 10, lacked standing, where plaintiff had not suffered any injury-in-fact.  188 F. Supp. 2d 1233.

  Plaintiffs, individual taxpayers in Hawaii, who claimed that provision of benefits exclusively to Hawaiians and/or native Hawaiians by office of Hawaiian affairs, Hawaiian homes commission, and department of Hawaiian home lands violated equal protection clause, had standing to assert only some of their equal protection claims.  198 F. Supp. 2d 1165.

  Where plaintiffs, seeking an order enjoining the executive director of the campaign spending commission, the commission, and the commissioners from taking any action adverse to plaintiffs, had not demonstrated a case or controversy for Article III purposes, court dismissed complaint for lack of jurisdiction and denied plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction as moot.  199 F. Supp. 2d 1018.

  Plaintiffs (identified as individual taxpayers in Hawaii and beneficiaries of a public land trust) seeking to stop defendants' provision of benefits to only persons of Hawaiian or native Hawaiian ancestry, had standing to seek to restrain State's expenditures of tax revenues on Hawaiian homes commission, department of Hawaiian home lands, and/or office of Hawaiian affairs.  299 F. Supp. 2d 1090.

  Clause 2 did not grant original jurisdiction to U.S. Supreme Court in a case between a state and one of its own citizens; additionally, original jurisdiction did not lie in the U.S. Supreme Court because the instant case involved state penal statutes and was not civil in nature.  77 H. 222 (App.), 883 P.2d 644.

  Where plaintiff failed to demonstrate in plaintiff's complaint "such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to warrant plaintiff's invocation of the court's jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on plaintiff's behalf," plaintiff lacked standing to challenge two city zoning and development ordinances.  96 H. 134 (App.), 28 P.3d 350.