DEEMS APPEAL FRIVOLOUS; CHANGES STANCE ON “IN FORMA PAUPERIS” STATUS
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jul. 17, 2017) — An order issued on Friday by a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Cody Robert Judy v. Obama, aka Barry Soetoro; Democratic National Committee and Organizing for Action, 17-4055, states that the appeal is “frivolous” but that it can go forward if the appellant, Judy, “pays the required fees.”
Judy had previously been granted in forma pauperis (IFP) status in the case, meaning that his income is insufficient for him to pay customary court fees and other associated costs.
Judy’s case, Judy v. Obama, 14-9396, began in July 2014 with the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah and was appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals after the District Court’s dismissal. Having obtained the same result from the Tenth Circuit, Judy appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015.
As a Democrat presidential candidate in 2008 and 2012, Judy is seeking restitution from the defendants for damages he allegedly suffered based on the Clayton Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Underlying that was Judy’s assertion that Obama did not meet the definition of “natural born Citizen,” a requirement in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution for the nation’s chief executive.
Obama claims a birth on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI, but no hospital in the Aloha State has claimed the event despite its well-known historical significance. Obama’s reported father was a British citizen when his son was born, another factor which some constitutional scholars say precludes Obama from possessing “natural born” status.
Judy alleges that the DNC and Obama’s political organization, Organizing for Action (OFA), knowingly put forth an ineligible presidential candidate who was elected by an uninformed electorate, serving as a usurper president and commander-in-chief for two terms.
Despite dozens of lawsuits beginning in August 2008 challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility, no court in the nation presented with the question has ordered discovery of Obama’s original identification documents in order to determine whether or not he is, in fact, a natural born citizen. As a former Democrat presidential candidate himself, Judy claims “standing” in the matter, a claim that has not been challenged by the courts.
Judy was granted IFP status by the District and Appellate courts in 14-9396. However, after appealing the case to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor denied him that status just before the high court embarked on its three-month summer recess.
Judy filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied after the Supreme Court returned from its break. The denial and Judy’s lack of funds were the determining factors in his abandoning the effort at the time.
In January of this year, Judy refiled his case at the District Court level to include newly-released information from a five-year criminal investigation into the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website in April 2011 purported to represent Obama’s original birth record. In a December press conference, lead investigator Mike Zullo revealed that two forensic analysts on different continents and working in different disciplines agreed with his conclusion that the image is a “computer-generated forgery.”
Also found to be fraudulent early on was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form.
As the appellate court noted, the District Court denied Judy’s motions, after which Judy appealed to the Tenth Circuit and to the Supreme Court’s newest member, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.
The new case was assigned #17-4055 by the Tenth Circuit. As of this writing, Judy has received no response from the Supreme Court as to the case’s status despite having received proof of delivery and making numerous inquiries to the clerk’s office.
Over the five years of the investigation, the mainstream media maintained a virtual blackout on Zullo’s findings, first announced on March 1, 2012. The initial revelations were augmented through two successive press conferences and a number of radio appearances, concluding with the December 15, 2016 presser.
While the opinion issued on Friday terms Judy’s appeal “frivolous,” it indicates that it could proceed were he to pay a $400 filing fee, citing “10th Cir. R. 3.3(B)(1), 42.1″ (p. 3).
In response to the court’s order, Judy told The Post & Email:
“In some ways it means Justice is only for sale. Proving my income was below the Federal Poverty level and the court’s continuing to order fees paid in the face of so much lawful evidence suggest this. Further, the District Court ruled in the affirmative for my Motion for IFP. The suggestion by the Court reflects justice might be ‘For Sale’ and certainly amplifies that the poor are discriminated against in the Court.
“I don’t think the ruling made a lick of sense because the District Court granted IFP status. It seems like an ‘excuse’ rather than a ‘reason.’ Would Justice take place if the ‘fees’ were paid by the ‘poor’? It seems quite a contradiction.
“The ‘Facts’ place the Court in a ‘cover-up’ because of the crimes against the US Elections. I think the ruling is a complete heist of Justice for the poor. It’s actually quite telling of the disrespect the Court has for US Elections. They have placed crimes against the US Elections in the ‘It’s OK’ category.
Judy also provided an invoice from the court for the filing fee:
Every judge who has ruled on the matter has said that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. That includes the 2012 Georgia ballot challenge. Judy was a party to that case, and unsuccessfully appealed it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
None of which has to do with the courts’ ruling that Judy failed to adequately explain explain why he entitled to $100 million under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, or the Clayton Act.
@Rickey Rick Damon
Well, without arguing the Cases you mentioned specifically, as they apply to dis-similiar situations and circumstances of [Citizen at the Time if the Adoption if this Constitution, and naturalization law] , I do respect you’ve given more attention and hearing to it than the Courts in my Case.
To bad the tiny open threads don’t count in real Court History and you’re not a Judge in the Federal Courts. I may have respected you more than those who gave opinions without Public Hearings.
The serious flaws are both our Constitutional Rights have been violated, yours as a Voter in US Elections, mine as a Presidential Candidate in 3 US Elections.
I’ll represent you as best I can. God Bless Us in representing this horrendous assault upon our Civil Rights.
CRJ
@ Cody Judy
Judge Richard Gordon in Allen v. Arizona Democratic Party, et al.:
Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986 (1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03(1898) (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV); Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678,684-88 (Ind. App. 2010) (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), DOES NOT HOLD OTHERWISE.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/293080/birthers-lose-again-kevin-d-williamson
@Cody Judy
What are you talking about? There is no requirement on this blog to list a phone number. There is a place to leave an email address, which I have done with every post.
If you believe what you posted, please post the exact quote from either the District Court or the Court of Appeals which says that they have excused Obama’s wrongdoing.
You appeal is in regard to your motion to have your lawsuit reopened. This means that everything filed from day one is relevant to your appeal.
@Bendore
Very Odd you would represent the [US Courts] ” Belief of not Believing ???
US Sen Res 511 mentions (2 Parents)
As does the Naturalization Law of
8 U.S. Code § 1401 – Nationals and citizens of United States at birth.
(c)
a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
Are we to suppose your “Belief” of the US Courts is such? Because, you offered no proof or Law in which it is cited [ two parents and birth in the US does not equal
[ natural born Citizen]
In fact, SCOTUS Precedent Case [Minor v. Happersett] also recognized there is no doubt those born in the country to it’s [Citizen[s]] (2 Parents) are themselves the natural born Citizens.
Of course no [nationalization law] requires for such.
FInd your comment un-fortified with Law and SCOTUS Case History.
PLEASE point out refutations with law rather than “your belief” of US COURTS “Belief”.
Thanks
CRJ
@RickDamon = Rickey
Decided to spare you the “work” and just prove your error. Of course the Tenth Circuit Appeal is in consideration of the relative Motions and Reconsideration referenced and not the outdated reference your referring to.
Why would you do that on purpose? To deceive everyone? Those are rhetorical. You goals and motives exposed.
Excusing the “crimes” against the US Elections by disenfranchising Hawaii’s State Democratic Party: Obama Constitutionally not Qualified https://t.co/zByCyTZzyD
US Courts do not believe in the two parents born on US soil theory of NBC. US Courts hold that if a person is born on US soil they are a NBC regardless of the citizenship of their parents and if a person is born abroad to at least one US Citizen they are a NBC.
Also, it is the position of the courts that the BC posted on the White House Site by Obama was a pdf and not a Certified Copy of a Hawaiian BC or in any way shape or form a work product of the state of Hawaii and hence, it cannot be used to prove or disprove the time or place of Obama’s birth and since it is a pdf it cannot possibly be a forgery of a Hawaiian BC because Hawaii only issues paper BCs
@Rickey
Re: “The District Court said no such thing.”
Before you make frivolous statements you should create a Scribd Account and Post the District Court Judges Order/Ruling on the [Motion for Relief of Judgement] and also the Order/Ruling on the [Motion for Reconsideration] and Post the Links here for reference. Then people could take some stock your comments not being malicious and deceptive.
Then we could see you [prove] your point about the District Court Judge not writing ,”Defendant’s were Excused”.
Please do some “work” for us instead of just against us , promoting your Fake News under a “anonymous name”, that would be really appreciated.
Also, Please also leave your Contact Email and Phone number in the comment section so we know you’re not a Robot.
Thanks.
@ Cody Judy
The District Court said no such thing. I have the District Court’s ruling in front of me.
You may be confusing the Court of Appeals ruling with the District Court’s ruling, but even that doesn’t say what you seem to believe it says. This is what the Court of Appeals said:
“Even taking all his allegations as true and construing them in the light most favorable to his case, we see nothing even suggesting that he would ever be entitled to any sort of relief for President Obama’s (and the other Defendants’) SUPPOSED wrongdoing.”
Neither the District Court nor the Court of Appeals ruled that any wrongdoing had taken place, so there was nothing for them to excuse.
As for precedent, nobody suggested that you had to find case law involving presidential eligibility. You needed to find some case, or at least some interpretation of § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act, which suggests that someone in even a remotely similar situation as yours would be entitled to relief under one or more of those statutes. Any lawyer who is familiar with appellate work would tell you the same thing.
Congratulations on raising the filing fee, but your appeal is going to be denied. If I am wrong about that, I will come back here and humbly apologize.
Thank you to every one in many different States of our Union for Helping and Supporting! #10thCircuit #TENTHCIRCUIT #Utpol #Birther https://t.co/U7TVtOVqWS
UPDATE: FILING FEE PAID (Friday 7-21-2017)
It was with a great appreciation and a few heart felt tears that i received in the mail the donations that totaled up the $505.00 Filing Fee for the Tenth Circuit Court.
My own contribution only had to be $100.00.
To the many people who reached deep into their own pockets to help and support, I say “Thank You!”
I immediately called the District Court Clerk Tracy and transferred the funds; so the US Tenth Circuit should recognize that Today.
Our Goal was reached, and it was on Time. Utah celebrates their State Holiday on the 24th of July with massive Fireworks. ..and every bank is closed Monday. So I really wanted to get it paid by today.
Thank you again for your quick and timely expedition of your contributions that came from many States of our Union. I do hope you will also feel a little spirit in accomplishments for our United States of America.
God Bless You all, and may God Bless our endeavor to preserve America’s Choice.
CRJ
http://www.codyjudy.us
http://www.codyjudy.blogspot.com
@RickDamon Pointing out the obvious that the Courts have no obligation to Review a labeled “frivolous” case moors those arguments and opinions.
The District Court related it had “excused the Defendants from wrong- doing” . They should not be excused.
Confusing “case law” for “law” is a low trick of words. Can you point out for all of us Case Law between Presdential Candidates with the [natural born Citizen] Art. II. Clause as Claim?
There is none to cite.
Can you point out Case Law where the US Elections were compromised by Corporations acting to usurp the Constitution with whole States being disenfranchised?
There are none.
It’s insulting intelligence to frame Precedent as moot because it hasn’t happened before.
@Cody Robert Judy
I’m not trying to argue facts with. I’m trying to point out to you, and to others, that the dismissal of your lawsuit, and the subsequent denials of your appeals, have nothing to do with your facts.
Both the District Court and the Court of Appeals ruled that you failed to demonstrate that you have a legal claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, or the Clayton Act. As far as the courts are concerned, nothing else matters. You have to get over that legal hurdle first before anything else comes into play.
I have read the opinions of the District Court and the Court of Appeals, and I have read your brief. The Court of Appeals ruled “Judy cites no basis in law for his claim that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act.” You still haven’t done that. Your appeal cites no precedent, no case law, and no legal expert opinion to establish that you are entitled to the damages that you are asking for.
You can’t win an appeal unless you address the specific reasons why your lawsuit was dismissed. Good luck if you raise the money to pay the filing fee, but I’m afraid that you need much more than just luck.
P.S. Cody will reach the mark for funds for the court filing. Others note, he hasn’t requested
funds for others needs. He is proud and wouldn’t ask for it. Others out there, if you feel led
to further assist Cody this will show we have his back. From what I can tell he like many of
us are self funded and working on related projects. In addition, Cody will have other costs in relation to the court filing. That would be traveling and etc…
Thank you @JefferyHarrison that is so appreciated.
@RickDamon – Don’t really like arguing the Facts in a forum that has no teeth. It seems a waste of my time.
Obots have been reduced to an obscure open-thread somewhere on a tiny island and seem most desperate to make of my life some kind of a Reality Show. For the life- of -me I can’t figure out “Why?” if it’s just a “waste” and they are “secure” in their claims and facts?
I always consider the source and motives behind such frothing excitement over saving everyone they don’t care about or know?
They always forget Obama’s own Attorney’s have mocked people for bringing actions into Court who did not have what they referred to as “standing as a Presidential Candidate”.
We all must consider if no Civil Right exist for a Presdential Candidate to run a “Fair & Equal” Race” under the US Constitution’s Standard, Professional Politicians feel free to “make -it-up” as they want, rather than adhering to the Will of “We The People” .
Tyranny is defined by a lack of adherence to a Fair Standard. It’s plain and simple.
I’ve often expressed the Obots should by all accounts be hoping and supporting the Courts taking a look at the evidence and arguments Publicly rather than the dark and secret chambers where “secret combinations & deals” get done that wipes out America’s Choice. They if their motives were True ought to be encouraging and supporting Hearings.
We see clearly, they do not want anyone to have “Standing”, and the reasons for that are nefarious.
9 times since 2000 the Congress has tried to change the definition of (Natural Born Citizen) and all 9 times… it Failed.
America’s Choice must be preserved and if they want a change, it needs to be done properly with 2/3rds of Congress responsibly towards the People’s Will in their Elected.
Until such, a stand must be taken for We The People. I have recognised this very clearly.
Cody, I sent you funds yesterday. Let me share with others if they use the mail, a good
way to send a donation is to use Priority Mail. Doing this, it should take 2 to 3 days to arrive.
In doing so, I also recommend using a Money Order.
Priority Mail takes 2 to 3 days (costs about $6.00). For 1 to 2 days, the Postal Service has Express Mail.
I have heard Cody speak many times. Likewise, I have read his articles, and I am impressed.
To me he is a bright person. Additional, I have spoke with Cody a few time over the phone.
He is a gentleman, and was highly respectful. Others have attacked him. I say, let’s give
this fellow a shot. Many have stabbed him via attacks. And after this, he still has shown a
good attitude. And I haven’t heard him speak ill of those who have been cruel to him.
Cody has lead the way. Bravely, he has stepped forward. He has not requested to be
carried. Being that he has lead by example, let’s have his back. Therefore, I hope other
too will assist him with funds to do his work.
UPDATE: Filing Fee
Received PayPal Donations
BALANCE at $305.00 for Filing Fee and we only need another $200.00 !
Help out Today if you can please.
http://codyjudy.us/information/codyrobertjudyforpresident2012_011.htm
This is much better than 5K for the SCOTUS Filing, that used the same excuse.
It’s obvious that the people commenting here don’t understand why Judy’s lawsuit was dismissed and why it has been found to be frivolous. The dismissal has NOTHING to do with Obama’s birth certificate.
Judy filed a civil lawsuit asking for money damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, and the Clayton Act. In 2014 District Court Judge Stewart ruled “After carefully reviewing Plaintiff’s Complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s suit is frivolous. Plaintiff’s claims lack an arguable basis in law or fact…” In other words, Judge Stewart was saying that Judy failed to state a claim which is legally recognized under the statutes he cited in his lawsuit. Judy appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Stewarts’s ruling, stating:
“Judy cites no basis in law for his claim that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. Even taking all his allegations as true and construing them in
the light most favorable to his case, we see nothing even suggesting that he would ever be entitled to any sort of relief for President Obama’s (and the other Defendants’) supposed wrongdoing. Judy cannot point to a single case that construes any of these statutes in a way supporting his claims for relief. Next, because we see no scenario where he would be entitled to relief under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act, we also agree with the district court that his complaint was frivolous.”
In order to prevail on appeal, Judy has to convince the Court that he is entitled to damages under § 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. But his appeal doesn’t even try to do that. Instead he just introduced more material about the birth certificate. But under the Federal Rules you can’t even get to the facts of your case until you have established that you have a legal claim for relief. Judy didn’t do that the first time he appealed this lawsuit, he didn’t do it when he appealed to the Supreme Court, and he hasn’t done it in this appeal.
Finally, he was denied In Forma Pauperis status because the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure specify that IFP motions must be denied in cases which have been ruled to be frivolous. Judy’s lawsuit has been ruled to be frivolous by both the District Court and the Court of Appeals, so he isn’t entitled to IFP status this time around.
I’ve got $200 saved for the Filing Fee out of my own pocket , we need $305 more.
Help out Today if you can please.
http://codyjudy.us/information/codyrobertjudyforpresident2012_011.htm
This is much better than 5K for the SCOTUS Filing, that used the same excuse.
Well, I don’t know whether you will win or not, but a small contribution is made to make Dr.Conspiracy mad,
I showed him that the birth certificate were no bound in binders , but where in post binders and could not be lain down for photographing and that meant the curvature on the birth certificate was fake,
Have fun with this stuff.
By the way he also deleted all the evidenceI presented to him. Must be good to be a strong Democrat.
Embarrassing #Justice for #Poor #TENTHCIRCUIT #10thCircuit Send$ or Failure2Prosecute excuted #Birther #Utpol #MAGA https://t.co/kkVd0OhibN https://t.co/9g16DTyczf
https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/887628091782070273
To TF Bow, the case is NOT frivolous. Obama usurped the Presidency,by fraud, during time of war. That made Obama a counterfeit POTUS and Joseph Biden a counterfeit VP. Obama is NOT an Article II, Sec. 1, “Natural Born Citizen”.
Cody Robert Judy is on solid constitutional grounds. Obama has never been the bona-fide President of the United States. I told people that (9) years ago. I stand my ground.
By virtue of the usurpation of the Presidency by Obama, during time of war, Obama became a spy under 10USC and a traitor under 18USC. See: “There is NO ‘President’ Obama”: htttp://www.thepostemail.com/09/17/2010/there-is-no-president-obama/
I spoke with a DOJ agent, Ms. Summers, at the DOJ in DC in June. I had sent a copy of a criminal information to US Attorney General Jeff Sessions by regular mail, in May,2017 regarding Obama’s usurpation. I had sent the original information,by regular mail, to President Trump.
In June, I RESENT the information, this time by Registered, Return Receipt requested. Tracking #s and all. The USPS has now confirmed that President Trump is IN RECEIPT of a letter that I wrote in May, 2017.
Obama is the nation’s SECOND counterfeit President. Chester Arthur did the same thing.
Indeed, McCain,Cruz,Rubio,Swarzenegger, and Jindal are likewise constitutionally barred from being POTUS or VP.
None of those people mentioned meet the legal definition of a “Natural Born Citizen” which is “One born in the US to parents who are both US Citizens themselves” (See: Minor v Happersett, (1874) USSCt. ) and which was affirmed and has been reaffirmed several times by the US Supreme Court.
I am currently suing Cruz,Rubio,Jindal and the State of NY in Laity v NY, NY State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 3rd Department. None of the (3) are NBCs. The NY State Board of Elections fraudulently misrepresents US Constitutional criteria for being POTUS, on their website. They cite the criteria as being “born a citizen” versus the actual criteria that a POTUS must be a “Natural Born Citizen”. The terms are NOT interchangeable nor are they tantamount to each other.
ALL NBCs are citizens but all citizens are NOT NBCs.
I say “all aboard, all aboard, the train is about to leave the station”. “Please have your ticket
ready and proceed to the gate”. “All others without tickets, please step aside for passengers
that have tickets”. In other words, I and others truly and fully support Cody Judy. Others,
we’re going to keep on, without you.
We know he has an uphill battle. But he is not only fighting on a personal level, but he is
also fighting for all Americans. He is brave and has a fighting spirit. Like our founding
fathers, he has led the charge.
This thing with Obama goes much deeper and darker than we know. Obama didn’t accomplish his tasks on his own. He was puppet. Who are the puppet masters?
Let’s (also) go after the other big fish and put them away too. Let’s starting thinking big and let’s bag the big bad guys (Obama’s handlers).
Our founding fathers took on the British and weren’t suppose to win. We don’t know if
Cody will win, but he has a lot of fight in him. He has been willing to be the point man.
He has only requested assistance when he has needed it. He has spent his own funds
and time. So, let’s not only support him with words and prayers, but honor his request
for assistance.
Ok.. MORE CLARIFICATION
TODAY 7-18-2017 I spoke with a District Court Clerk 3 times and a Tenth Circuit Court Clerk 1×., for about an hour.
There is a Team of 5 Clerks in The US Circuit Court that handles (Utah) and the one I spoke with yesterday was singing a different song than the one I spoke with today.
It’s a story all by itself, but I won’t get into it, or relate the conversations and conflictions of the Clerks , but will relate the Interest Points of the relative ruling.
It is [not] the District Court Fees that i have to pay, it is the [Appellate Court Fees ]($550.00). This will be confirmed by the District Court Clerk when she receives the Ruling. ( Thursday at the latest )
I will comment the Order is a little confusing if you did not know that the District Court collects “Filing and Docket Fees” for the Appellate Courts as well as themselves.
Let me also express the “outright embarrassments I feel towards Justice as I know many of you do, at the idea of providing all the evidence and facts I have as a Presidential Candidate against another Presidential Candidate to have the Courts call the Complaint “Friviolous”.
A moron could understand it, but the Justices … well., I better not say. Let me express my biggest reason and expectations for paying the Filing Fee.
Justices may think I’m buried and its a self imposed fine, but to be buried eternally in the gravestones of history with 30 pieces of silver just like Judas was as Traitor (accept to our US Constitution) will be their Reward.
It’s not a little case, it’s not a thing of the past, it’s US HISTORY and it’s BIG.
To be apart of the Crowd who would dig with their fingernails into the ground for a hole to hide in the dark, rather than FACE the Lord and his all consuming light and Truth, is a fate I really think is deserving of Traitors and Tyrants.
I think if they WANT the MONEY , we should be kind and loving and give it to them. ❤ The Lord can sort it out as He Wills.
I’m completely content with what I’ve done, and how I’ve represented the Facts. To COVER UP the Truth and the Crimes is for the dead who are walking to ask for a shovel to dig their grave.
“Let them have the shovel for Heavens sake”
At this point, it is just cruel to encourage Judy further: this case has been repeatedly called frivolous by the various courts, and Judy needs to focus on the more immediate concern of finding permanent housing.