Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Edmond George Parenteau v. United States
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2024-2140 · judgment May 6, 2025
Question presented
PERTAINING TO LOWER FEDERAL COURT, APPEALS COURTS CRITICAL ERRORS IN REFUSAL TO ADDRESS CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND LAW PRINCIPLES PERTAINING TO PETITIONERS RIGHT TO TRAVEL FREELY
-
. How is it possible, according to constitutionally protected rights, the United States, and States are not acting outside their statutory authority regarding the right to travel? Memorandum of law at # Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 46 through 59
-
. How is it possible, according to constitutionally protected rights, the United States, and States are not forcing, under Color of Law, Sovereign people to register their automobiles through the DMV departments when their own rules and regulations prescribe it a voluntary program? See Memorandum of Law at # Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 17 through 59
-
. How is it possible, according to constitutionally protected rights, United States and States through the Departments of DMV can convert a right to travel into a privilege to drive? See Memorandum of Law at # Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 46 through 59 (4). How is it possible, according to the Constitution and laws, that the Judge's UNREPORTED OPINIONS Case No. 1:2-cv-00736-KCD and U. S. Appeals Court For the Federal Circuit Case# 2420-2140 did not make Critical Errors that resulted in many violations? (5). How is it possible that an Unreported Opinion supersedes constitutional law? See Memorandum of Law at # Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 16 through 45 (6). How is it possible, according to constitutional law, that an opinion can have any basis according to law without any findings of facts and conclusions of law? See Memorandum of Law at # Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 16 through 45 (7). How is it possible, according to constitutional law, that the judges' orders by both Courts rejecting the filing of a collateral attack did not act under Color of Law resulting in violation of due process of law? See Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4 at Numbers 16 through 45
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Edmond George Parenteau
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Proceedings
- Apr 27 2026Rehearing DENIED.
- Apr 08 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/24/2026.
- Nov 18 2025Petition for Rehearing filed.
- Nov 10 2025Petition DENIED.
- Oct 09 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
- Oct 06 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Jun 13 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 3, 2025)