AletheiaAdmin: Index verified holdings and limits from primary opinions

2026-11-01T00:00:00Z

Index verified holdings and limits from primary opinions

New page

'''Status: Source checked (31 October 2026).''' This index helps readers locate the opinions used in [[Claims Under Examination]]. A case decides issues on its record; a useful citation includes the court, year, question, holding, and limit. Federal circuit opinions bind within their circuit under applicable rules, while a nonprecedential order has a more limited role. This is not a substitute for current law or counsel in a live case.

== Status and court jurisdiction ==
* [https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Path=Y2011%2FD08-18%2FC%3A09-1190%3AJ%3AHamilton%3Aaut%3AT%3AfnOp%3AN%3A753424%3AS%3A0&Submit=Display ''United States v. Benabe'', 654 F.3d 753, 767 (7th Cir. 2011)] — in federal criminal appeals, the Seventh Circuit rejected personal sovereignty, secured-party, and “flesh-and-blood” immunity theories. Its principal appeal also concerned courtroom disruption and trial presence. See [[Court jurisdiction and sovereign status]].
* [https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/7/1340/478997/ ''United States v. Hilgeford'', 7 F.3d 1340, 1342 (7th Cir. 1993)] — rejected a claimed “Indiana State Republic” status as a basis to escape federal jurisdiction; the case also addressed tax and evidentiary issues. The linked page reproduces the published appellate opinion, which ''Benabe'' itself cites.
* [https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/OpinionsWeb/processWebInputExternal.pl?Path=Y2026%2FD01-14%2FC%3A25-1537%3AJ%3APerCuriam%3Aaut%3AT%3AnpDp%3AN%3A3478685%3AS%3A0&Submit=Display ''United States v. Oliver'', No. 25-1537 (7th Cir. Jan. 14, 2026)] — a ''nonprecedential'' order rejecting claimed foreign-sovereign and separate “corporate” identity immunity in a federal criminal appeal. It cites ''Benabe''; do not present it as a new precedential rule.

== Travel and motor vehicles ==
* [https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep235/usrep235610/usrep235610.pdf ''Hendrick v. Maryland'', 235 U.S. 610, 622–24 (1915)] — the Supreme Court upheld reasonable, uniform state motor-vehicle registration and licensing rules against a challenge by a nonresident driving his own car. It did not decide the validity of every modern stop, fee, or state law. See [[Right to travel and driver licensing]].

== Tax claims and the meaning of an opinion ==
* [https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-362/pdf/USREPORTS-362-145.pdf ''Flora v. United States'', 362 U.S. 145 (1960)] — addressed full payment before a federal district-court income-tax refund suit. Its description of “voluntary assessment and payment” at page 176 was part of that analysis, not an opt-out holding. See [[What voluntary compliance means in federal income tax]].
* [https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep498/usrep498192/usrep498192.pdf ''Cheek v. United States'', 498 U.S. 192 (1991)] — addressed willfulness in certain ''criminal'' tax prosecutions. A genuinely held misunderstanding of duty can be considered even if objectively unreasonable, while a belief that a known law is unconstitutional is different. The case did not decide that wages are exempt from income tax. See [[Wages as taxable income]].

== How to use this list ==
Read the linked opinion and the article's argument and counterargument. Ask whether the quote is a holding, a factual description, dictum, or a discussion of a different legal element. Note the court, procedural posture, and date. A genuine jurisdictional, constitutional, or tax dispute must be evaluated under its own law and record; these opinions reject particular asserted shortcuts, not the right to challenge government conduct. Suggest a missing authority through [[Aletheia:Suggest a claim or correction]].

[[Category:Sovereignty Without Illusion]]
[[Category:Legal claims]]

Sovereignty Without Illusion case law index - Revision history

AletheiaAdmin: Index verified holdings and limits from primary opinions