United States Supreme Court in two cases: Balzac v. Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298 (1921) and Mookini v. United States, 303 U.S. 201 (1938) made it clear that a " district court of the United States " described a court created under Article III and a "United States district court " described a territorial court.

The issue presented is:

Should this court end the conflict in lower courts by applying Balzac, Id. and Mookini, Id. rules nationwide that the enacted law at Sections 81-131 of Title 28 U.S.C Chapter 5 DISTRICT COURTS, where in the rest of Chapter 5, Congress explains that only one district court in all of the 50 states, Hawaii, has been established as an Article III judicial court and explains why that court cannot function as a court exercising judicial power as an operation of law which is the pre-cursor to the secondary questions thus disapproving lower courts' interpretation of Sections 81-131 of Title 28 U.S.C Chapter 5 DISTRICT COURTS as adopted in Balzac, Id. and Mookini, Id.l

Whether the lower courts have correctly interpreted Sections 81-131 of Title 28 U.S.C. Chapter 5 - DISTRICT COURTS in light of the Supreme Court's rulings in Balzac v. Porto Rico and Mookini v. United States