In Re Ryan D. Mumme

Whether the applicant has a right to the relief he demands;

If he has a right, and that right has been violated, whether the laws of his country afford him a remedy; and

If they do afford him a remedy, whether it is a mandamus issuing from this Court (questions 1-3 being adapted from Chief Justice Marshall’s Marbury).

Whether our Constitution’s Article 111, at its Sections 1 and 2 - when read together, constitutes potential for direct, judicial, financial conflicts of interest; wherever and whenever, the United States - as sole, Section 1 Compensator, appears in Section 2, Federal controversies - as here in Petitioner’s lower court case, as a named party - facially, thereby, stripping that Federal Court of its Article 111 jurisdiction; ensuring a self-defeating outcome for the USA in consequence; should it so choose to both appear and proceed in any Federal, Section 2 controversy .

Whether our Constitution, now at its Articles I and II, in addition, shows the United States also solely and directly compensating all Legislative and Executive Branch employees as well; doing so there, however, apart from any apparent, constitutional impediment.

Whether any provision of our Constitution expressly grants the sovereign United States, or any branch of our subordinate, federal government, immunity from suit.

Whether an individual waiver of sovereign immunity can be implied, or must, instead, be unequivocally expressed; solely by the sovereign United States themselves, by Article V convention.

Whether the Congress - as subordinate, has the constitutional power to freely act, at any time, on the sovereign’s behalf, to simply waive the sovereign’s immunity - in cases and legislation Congress wishes to engage in, and do so apart from the expressed permission of the sovereign, as is, for instance, garnered solely, it appears, by Article V Convention, and that apart from that same,