Legal Opinion
McLaren v. United States Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided April 30, 1998No. CIV. A. 97-1561 (PFL), 97-1939 (PLF), 97-2123 (PLF)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.
These three consolidated cases stem from the same premise: that the Republic of Texas was never legitimately annexed by the United States and never became a state of the United States, and that the Republic of Texas therefore remains a sovereign nation bordered by the United States of America and Mexico. Under this premise, plaintiff Richard McLaren is the self-appointed “Chief Ambassador and Consul General” of the “Republic of Texas.” As purported residents of another country, plaintiffs Richard McLaren and his wife Evelyn McLaren,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wilton Chatman-Bey v. Richard Thornburgh, Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1988
- Texas v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Steven Guerra v. Edwin Meese, IIICourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1986
- United States v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Cecil Tutt v. Lewis DobyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Grigsby v. ThomasDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
- Dingler v. ThompsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Grigsby v. ThomasDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Richard Lance McLaren v. All US Judges, ET AL.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2025
- Womack v. ChilesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009