WILL TENTH CIRCUIT EXAMINE “FACTS AND EVIDENCE?”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jul. 25, 2017) — On Tuesday, The Post & Email published Part 2 of its interview with Cody Robert Judy, who has a case pending in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama and alleging that Judy’s civil rights were violated as a Democratic candidate for president when the DNC proffered an ineligible candidate as its nominee.
Part 1 of the interview is here.
On July 14, a three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit dismissed Judy’s appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah as “frivolous” based on the lower court’s ruling, but stated that if he paid the customary filing fee, the court would proceed with a review.
To that time, Judy had been given permission to file his case in forma pauperis (IFP), meaning that he does not have the financial means to pay customary court fees. IFP status is granted in certain instances after a plaintiff demonstrates, by submitting a financial affidavit, to the court where the action is filed.
Judy had challenged Obama’s eligibility before, in 2008, when he also ran for president as a Democrat, and again in 2012 under the same circumstances. Also in 2008, he filed a lawsuit challenging Sen. John McCain’s eligibility on the basis that McCain was born outside of the United States and is not a “natural born Citizen,” as the Constitution requires of the nation’s chief executive.
Judy repeated his quest for the presidency in 2016.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution mandates that the president and commander-in-chief of the military be a “natural born Citizen.” The term of art is one of three presidential qualifications included by the Framers during the Constitutional Convention of 1789, the other two being that the person must have resided in the United States for 14 years and be 35 years of age or older at the time of inauguration.
The “grandfather clause” included in Article II allowed any of the Framers to become president while acknowledging that they were not “natural born Citizens.” It is that exception to which many scholars and constitutional experts point when making the case that the Founders intended a difference between the term “citizen” and “natural born Citizen.”
As Judy has stated in previous interviews and his own articles, U.S. representatives and senators are required to be “citizens” in order to qualify for federal office, but the president must be a “natural born Citizen.”
There exists a debate over whether a person born in the United States to parents who are citizens of another country can be considered “natural born.” Similarly, questions have arisen over children born in foreign countries to U.S.-citizen parents, including those serving overseas in the military.
One such child, now an adult in his 60s, last year provided The Post & Email with documentation showing that although born to a U.S. military father serving in Germany, he is considered a “naturalized” citizen and not “natural born.”
The Framers vested Congress with the authority to make law regarding the process of foreigners becoming U.S. citizens, or “naturalizing.”
Judy believes that a “natural born Citizen” is a person born in the United States to two U.S.-citizen parents and nothing less.
Obama claims a birth in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Both before and during the course of his presidency, several differing life narratives emerged which have not been reconciled, including that Obama is “an immigrant” to the U.S.
Even the most liberal interpretations of the “natural born Citizen” clause do not include naturalized citizens as eligible for the presidency.
On March 1, 2012, a former detective investigating the validity of a “long-form” birth certificate image posted at whitehouse.gov the previous year bearing Obama’s name declared it a “computer-generated forgery.” Also found fraudulent was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, which has been mailed to an unknown number of FOIA requesters beginning in late 2008.
The FBI declined to investigate the findings despite admitting knowledge of the reported forgeries.
Over the course of his five-year investigation, the former detective, Mike Zullo, working under the auspices of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), held three press conferences to inform the public of his findings: March 1, 2012; July 17, 2012; and December 15, 2016.
Judy took particular note of the final presser in which Zullo divulged that two independent forensic analysts who perform their own examinations of the long-form birth certificate image reached conclusions very similar to Zullo’s own.
The media virtually ignored those revelations and appeared relieved that the investigation would close with Sheriff Joseph Arpaio’s on December 31 following his November 8 election loss to Paul Penzone.
No media outlet nationally or internationally has investigated Zullo’s findings nor asked the former Obama administration for comment. Instead, most major U.S. media have ridiculed and attempted to discredit Arpaio and Zullo for undertaking the task at considerable personal and professional risk.
Because Judy viewed the new information Zullo released in December as directly pertinent to his Obama eligibility challenge, he reopened a previous lawsuit, Judy v. Obama, 14-9396, at its point of origin, the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, in January of this year. In the new filing, Judy included the “new evidence” Zullo conveyed as alleged criminal activity which could be presented directly to a federal judge under the Clayton Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
On April 10, Judge Ted Stewart dismissed the case without requiring the defendants to supply a response, after which Judy appealed to the Tenth Circuit and newly-sworn U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.
Neither Gorsuch nor the Supreme Court clerk’s office has responded to the filing other than to return proof of delivery to the sender.
Last week, after a public appeal, Judy was able to raise the $505 which the Tenth Circuit required him to pay to the U.S. District Court in order for the Tenth Circuit to move forward. He paid the fee on Friday afternoon and promptly received a receipt in his mail on Saturday from the District Court.
Out of dozens, and perhaps more than 100, eligibility challenges to Obama’s election and occupation of the White House over the last nine years, Judy’s is the only remaining case and the sole one to be filed after Obama left office.
While no eligibility challenge has yet been heard by the courts on its merits, certain individuals who have ridiculed for years the idea that the Obama long-form birth certificate image is not genuine are nevertheless watching Judy’s case very closely.
“It’s very, very significant when you think you have rights and are able to walk into a court and have your constitutional rights upheld,” Judy said. “You hear the Democratic Party and Republican Party say that the Constitution is so important whenever somebody else is in violation, but when they’re in violation, holy cow!”
I made that argument from the beginning: just because the two parties are the majority parties doesn’t mean that they both can’t be in the tank as far as being destructive of the Constitution, especially when it’s spelled out pretty clearly to we who recognize that if you were a “citizen” at the time of adoption of the Constitution, it was OK; thereafter, you have to be a “natural born Citizen.” It doesn’t mean “anchor babies.” It doesn’t mean Kim Jong-Un can come over here and have a wife have a baby over here on American soil and get him into the presidency.
That’s why people who think that just being born here is sufficient are wrong. The House Judiciary Committee recognized in their hearings on the issue that it takes time for acclimation to our American principles when you come from a dictatorship or a tyranny-led country. People’s psyche has to completely change, and that takes at least two generations. That’s why I’ve fought for “born in the United States to U.S.-citizen parents.”
Other than me, there is no one over the last nine years who has kept up the prosecution. Others, if they try to jump into court right now, will get a dismissal for failing to prosecute. The legal status just dies. There are a few people who recognize that and know that if my case fails, it’s over. I am very grateful to those who donated to raise the filing fee.
My Motion for Reconsideration specifically named the criminal code and laid it out as plainly and simply as possible. If the courts don’t think when crimes are committed that there are any victims, then they’re not upholding a standard of law. You cannot forge a federal document or make a fake document; it should be obvious to everyone that you can’t usurp the office of the presidency that way. If they don’t bring this out, they’re basically asking for total anarchy.
Trump is reportedly considering Ted Cruz for attorney general, who he said he had standing to sue for not being eligible for the presidency. For all the Republicans, I think it’s important that they be reminded that Trump said he had standing to sue Ted Cruz. That should tell us that presidential candidates have standing. If Trump didn’t sue, it could be because he’s a nice guy, but we could look at the other side of the coin and say, “He realized what’s happening in the judicial branch and didn’t want to take the chance of losing.” But Trump has nothing to worry about as to whether or not he’s a natural born Citizen.
In John Jay’s letter to George Washington, he referred to people inside the government with foreign influence. If Ted Cruz gets in there as AG, do you think there are going to be any prosecutions of foreigners running for president? That’s the risk of letting in someone who has violated the law; they’re going to take it over.
For people to say Obama’s circumstance of qualification is not at odds with every other President in U.S. history is just not dealing with reality. What’s important about that is each president represents a “Case-In-Law” with a precedent.
Just because we haven’t had a successful hearing of a presidential candidate against a presidential candidate doesn’t mean that I’m not right or correct in my facts. For some to keep assuming that I haven’t stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, if I can’t challenge someone with the claim of the Constitution of not being a natural born Citizen, as I said, then nobody can. That just opens the executive branch of our government open to foreigners.
Somebody who isn’t a natural born citizen is a foreigner. A “citizen” is a foreigner if he’s in the office of the president.
When The Post & Email asked Judy what he expects the Tenth Circuit to do next, he responded:
What we’re looking to see from the Tenth Circuit is if the District Court ruled unlawfully that my case is frivolous. What they said was, “If the money is paid, then we’ll undertake and look at the evidence to see if the District Court ruling was in error.” So they haven’t ruled that my case is frivolous. The law dictates that they have to rule that the case is frivolous if it’s IFP and the District Court has ruled that it’s frivolous. If the fee is paid, they will look at all of the facts and the evidence and undertake the decision as to whether the District Court ruled unlawfully that it was frivolous.
The appellate court has not said it’s frivolous; they said, “If you pay the fee, we’ll take a look and see if it’s frivolous.” We’re asking, “Was one single judge wrong?” and it’s been proven over and over that often, a judge is wrong. In my case, it’s pretty clear that he was.
At 9:30 a.m. EDT, The Post & Email sent a message to the White House through its contact form:
Good morning, this is a media inquiry regarding an active lawsuit challenging Barack Hussein Obama’s constitutional eligibility as well as alleging criminal activity given that his long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form were declared fraudulent by a criminal investigator working under former Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio.
In December, the investigator, Mike Zullo, announced in a final press conference that two forensic analysts who are well-respected in their industries each conducted its own examination of the birth certificate image and agreed with Zullo’s findings that it cannot represent a genuine, paper document.
Is the White House following this case? Does the U.S. Justice Department have any intention of investigating Zullo’s conclusions?
Thank you very much.
A little bit of info. Called the Tenth Circuit Court Clerk Team 2. The Clerk said it’s been set for Review. Said he just couldn’t say how long, but noticed a couple of cases ahead of it. I asked if the Tenth Circuit had sessions or went on Summer Break like the SCOTUS. He said , “No, they don’t”. After a Case is set for Review it’s usually 2 to 3 weeks.