Did the Hawaii Supreme Court violate due process by dismissing a complaint with prejudice?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED | Article II of the Constitution provides that “Each State shall appoint [electors for President’ and Vice President] in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 2 (emphasis added). That power is “plenary,” and the statutory provisions enacted by the legislature in the furtherance of that duty may not be ignored by state. election officials or changed by state courts. Bush v. Gore(“Bush II”),531 U.S. 98, 104-05 (2000). Under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, neither the federal government nor state governments may deprive any person “of life, liberty, or property without Due process of law” These questions are therefore presented; Question 1, Did the Hawaii Supreme Court violate rights and due process under the First and Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by dismissing with prejudice — Complaint SCEC-20-0721, on the basis of laches? . . (a) Is this a foreclosure for any opportunity for Petitioners to seek retrospective and prospective relief and enforcement for ongoing constitutional and all other statue violations in elections? . Question 2. Was Petitioners Due Process violated when a motion for reconsideration, which was timely, filed 12/17/20, 9 days after motion to dismiss, was denied? Complaint SCEC-20-0721 had already been marked “CLOSED”, i . and an “S” which signifies judgment has been satisfied prior to 12/17/20. Hawaii Rules of Civil procedures, Rule 40 allows10 days to file motion for reconsideration after order for dismissal is issued. (a) Did State of Hawaii Attorney General violate Due Process by granting permission to Chief Election Officer to certify results of Hawaii 2020 election 12/9/20 immediately upon Hawaii Supreme Court issued order for dismissal? HRS§11-156 If there is an election contest these certificates shall be delivered only after a final determination in the contest has been made and the time for an appeal has expired. [L 1970, c 26, pt of §2; am L 1986, c 305, §4; am L 2012, c 34, §1; am L . 2014, ¢ 139, §1] Question 3 Did the State of Hawaii legislature violate the Federal Constitution, U.S. Code Title 52 Voting and Elections, and the 2010 Plain Writing Act (Public Law 111-274) by | enacting legislation passed in 2019 as Act 136, “Vote By Mail”? Act 136 is the “new” guide to conduct all State of Hawaii and all federal elections pursuant to Article I, and Article II of the U.S Constitution. Hawaii’s Act 136, “Vote by Mail” in its final version of has 75 of the 96 pages that are entirely incoherent, and crossed out or lined out. ii PARTIES TO PROCEEDINGS I. An Original Complaint SCEC-20-0721, State of Hawaii Supreme Court, In connection with multiple violations of U.S. Constitution, federal and state statues, federal and state guidelines, rules, procedures for federal, state, and local elections. Filed November 23, 2020, in compliance with Title 2 ELECTIONS. HRS§11-172, §11-173.3, §11-174, §11-175. . Note; All parties do not appear in caption of case on the cover page. This is a