Question: The plaintiff, a private citizen, sought to obtain for Native Americans "just compensation for the minerals mined in the Black Hills of South Dakota." He averred that the Black Hills belonged to Native Americans and were taken from them in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. He also asserted in one of several consolidated complains that American companies that operate sweatshops "should not be allowed to enter into international trade with the United States," and asked that the court enjoin such trade. Additionally, he contended that the "globalization of the auto industry violate[s] the Sherman AntiTrust Act." In yet another complaint, he contended that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is"in violation of the Treaty of Unification of Pharmacopeial Formulas for Patent Drugs." Finally, he pled that the "U.S.A.," presumably the federal government, is "trading in fur seals in violation of [a] treaty." How should the federal district judge assigned to these consolidated cases resolve them? Why? See Demos v. U.S., 2007 WL 1492413 (CIT), 29 ITRD 1926 (U.S. Court of International Trade 2007).