Wenger v. Warren

A 36 year Marine Donald Wenger has asked the Supreme Court of the United States whether state Judge James Warren and his appointee Richard Muir are bound by the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA) and the Veterans Judicial Review Act (VJRA), thereby Required to Obey the strict definition of "disposable retired pay" found in 10 U.S.C. § 1408 and the Complete Federal Preemption expressed in 38 U.S.C. § 511.

Read Wenger's Petition for Certiorari in HTML or PDF .

These are simple constitutional questions that will uncover 3 decades of predatory discrimination and fraud that have caused thousands of veterans to die by suicide or homelessness.

The Wenger v. Warren case also recalls other veteran cases that were appealed to SCOTUS from state courts. The questions in those appeals are presented differently, but all of them can be settled by an answer to the Questions presented above.

The other cases recalled by Wenger are:

1. William R. Lott v. Maria V. Lott,
   US Supreme Court No. 24-1160 (Cert. denied 10/6/2025)
   The veteran asked this Court to answer the Constitutional Questions about whether the Virginia court disobeyed the rulings of this Court in McCarty, Mansell and Howell by completely reinventing the USFSPA by creative interpretation with no jurisdiction to change the “plain and precise language” of 10 U.S.C. § 1408.
2. Jeremy N. Miller v. Casi A. Miller,
   US Supreme Court No. 24-1313 (Cert. denied 10/6/2025)
   The veteran asked this Court to answer Constitutional Questions about whether the Tennessee court is bound by the complete preemption of state jurisdiction established by the VJRA and expressed in current positive law 38 U.S.C. § 511. The Tennessee Courts claim to be bound by the Rose v. Rose decision instead of the plain text of 38 USC 511 pursuant to the Constitution.
3. Michael B. Yourko v. Lee Ann B. Yourko,
   US Supreme Court No. 23-999 (Cert. denied 10/7/2024)
   The veteran asked this Court to answer Constitutional Questions about whether the Virginia courts violated federal preemption by ruling that state contract law would be enforceable in conflict with the USFSPA and the VJRA.
4. Erich M. Martin v. Raina L. Martin,
   US Supreme Court No. 23-605 (Cert. denied 10/7/2024)
   The veteran asked this Court to answer Constitutional Questions about whether the Nevada courts violated federal preemption by ruling that state contract law takes precedent over the plain text of the USFSPA.
5. Ray James Foster v. Deborah Lynn Foster,
   US Supreme Court No. 22-1089 (Cert. denied 10/2/2023)
   The veteran asked this Court whether the Michigan courts used the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel to circumvent the USFSPA and the VJRA where it is also clear that CRSC is NOT retired pay in the first place, thereby NOT open to state court authority.
6. Kevin Lee Boutte, Petitioner v. Yvonne Renea Boutte,
   US Supreme Court No. 21-44 (Cert. denied 10/4/2021)
   The veteran asked this Court whether the Louisiana courts used the doctrines of estoppel and res judicata to circumvent the USFSPA and the VJRA.

All of this boils down a simple question of whether state judges are required to obey federal preemption and whether they can get sued when they cross that line. ...

This has been going on for many years. According to Wenger, lawyers and judges have been using the all kinds of semantic nonsense to commit this fraud even though is has been totally illegal ever since Mansell v. Mansell (1989) as pointed out by the Supreme Court in Howell v. Howell (2017).

None of the people committing this fraud has ever had the integrity to acknowledge the FACT that exclusive federal jurisdiction on the Subject Matter of Title 38 veteran benefits is separate and distinct from exclusive federal jurisdiction the Subject Matter of Title 10 Armed Forces of the United States.

None of them seem to comprehend the simple FACT that federal preemption noted in McCarty, Mansell and Howell still stands in the plain and precise language of the USFSPA. State jurisdiction on divorce does NOT happen to cancel federal preemption on Title 10 or Title 38.

Obviously the supreme laws controlling jurisdiction on these federal subject matters have always been intended to protect service members, veterans, retirees AND their families from the predatory corruption of law and profiteering by lawyers.

State judges have been getting away with crossing the line of federal preemption for years, but doing something illegal for a long time does not happen to make it become legal. Year after year of predatory discrimination and fraud does not change the laws that say veteran benefits are exempt from state jurisdiction.

"Unlawful acts, performed long enough and with sufficient vigor, are never enough to amend the law. To hold otherwise would be to elevate the most brazen and longstanding injustices over the law, both rewarding wrong and failing those in the right." McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. 894 (2020)