History is filled with stories of the powerful expropriating the land, resources, and women of the vanquished. It's a story as old as humankind.

Would the splintered sovereignty movement be able to agree to a termination of dependency on the US welfare state?

The US warfare apparatus would never allow a Hawaiian succession, so why is a constitutional lawyer entertaining the possibility?
A more pertinent essay would of been on the high costs of the US judicial system subverting justice. Perhaps next time.