Camarda v. Whitehorn, et al. – Case No. 25-5166
(U.S. Supreme Court – Certiorari Docket)

FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT STATUS – July 25, 2025

OVERVIEW

After a historic run through the Seventh Circuit, where 29 procedural filings went unrebutted and default was entered under FRAP 31(c), the Camarda case is now docketed with the U.S. Supreme Court under Case No. 25-5166. This certiorari petition challenges unlawful Title IV-D enforcement, retaliatory prosecution, and state defiance of federal supremacy. The Seventh Circuit judgment is formally contested, and Supreme Court review is underway.

Victory was secured in the Seventh Circuit; national precedent now lies in the Supreme Court’s hands.

POSTURE SUMMARY

SEVENTH CIRCUIT STATUS

Despite procedural irregularities in DKT 139 and DKT 140, the Seventh Circuit received over 30 filings from the Plaintiff, including:

As of July 2025, the appellate record is preserved and transmitted. No defendants filed a brief. The Seventh Circuit default is a matter of record.

The Seventh Circuit failed to defend the judgment. The burden now lies solely with SCOTUS.

STRATEGIC POSITION – SCOTUS REVIEW

The Plaintiff’s filings invoke:

The response deadline of August 21 is final. If no filing is received, the Plaintiff may move for judgment or proceed under Rule 15.5.

LIVE LINKS

All documents filed by Plaintiff are under public license and available for research and enforcement review.

CLOSING POSITION

This is a case of national impact. With over 500,000 similarly situated families across the U.S., Camarda v. Whitehorn represents a landmark federal challenge to the misuse of Title IV-D enforcement and unlawful state retaliation.

This is no longer just a personal case. It is now a matter of federal constitutional law.

CASE DOCUMENT ARCHIVE

April 21, 2025 Update
April 16, 2025 Update
April 6, 2025 Update
March 19, 2025 Update

To read the full public filings, court documents, and enforcement strategy updates, visit:

Note: DKT 139/140 were released as a nonprecedential panel disposition and final judgment, but are procedurally rebutted. They do not reflect the full legal record, including unrebutted summary judgment, en banc petition, or FRAP 31(c) default. These entries remain part of the timeline but not the final legal outcome.

All documents are legally verified, and available for public review under transparency protocol.

Prepared: July 25, 2025