Nathaniel Brian Verellen v. Michigan

Did the State of Michigan erroneously redefine “registration plate” so as to unlawfully broaden and apply Michigan Traffic Code, MCL 257.256, License Plate Unlawful Use, to a presumptively valid tribal plate and, in so doing, decide an important federal question in a way that conflicts with relevant decisions of this Court, a United States court of appeals, another state court of last resort or treaty?

In requiring a “reciprocity agreement” with the Cherokee Nation of Indians, is the State of Michigan discriminating against the Nation in violation of the Indian Commerce Clause? Relatedly, is the State’s requirement of a reciprocity agreement consistent with MCL 257.243?

Does the State of Michigan have inherent authority to deny an Indian tribe’s sovereignty based solely on whether it is listed in the federal register? Has the name “Cherokee Nation” listed in the Federal Register been defined exclusively by Congress so as to be synonymous with anyone of several Cherokee Bands of the greater Cherokee Nation of Indians?

Did the State of Michigan violate the defendant’s due process rights under the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution?