Michael Yellen v. United States

MEMORANDUM

Michael S. Yellen appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action alleging violations of federal constitutional law and international law arising from the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy and Hawaii’s subsequent annexation by the United States. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Pakootas v. Tech Cominco Metals, Ltd., 646 F.3d 1214, 1218 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Yellen’s action because his claims presented non-justiciable political questions over which the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. See Corrie v. Caterpillar, Inc., 503 F.3d 974, 980 (9th Cir. 2007) (holding that “the presence of a political question deprives a court of subject matter jurisdiction” and explaining that a non-justiciable political question is found when there is “a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing without leave to amend. See McQuillion v. Schwarzenegger, 369 F.3d…