Ok, here's how things stand:
Patunia raises a valid point, mainly the rights of regions to pass laws where the federal government has no authority. However, the Midwest has no laws concerning any issues you have outlined. If the Midwestern Regional Government were to pass a law banning civil unions, for instance, then we would have a valid conflict to be settled. Patunia as a citizen cannot unilaterally sue if he has not been personally affected by this federal law.
A valid point ,and I half expected as much in response. Thank you for your reply.
