Obama Eligibility/Forgery Lawsuit Dismissed by Tenth Circuit


by Sharon Rondeau

(Aug. 19, 2017) — On August 15, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, CO issued an “Order and Judgment” in case number 17-4055 appealed from the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah by plaintiff Cody Robert Judy affirming the lower court’s determination that the case was “frivolous.”

The civil suit first arose in July 2014 when Judy, representing himself, claimed that Barack Hussein Obama, the DNC, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, then-Sen. Harry Reid, and the political action group Organizing for Action (OFA) violated his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and provisions of the Clayton Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

In 2008, 2012 and 2016, Judy ran for president as a Democrat. In 2008, he filed dual lawsuits claiming, respectively, that Obama and his Republican challenger, Sen. Jon McCain, were ineligible to seek the office of president because, Judy said, they were not “natural born Citizens.”

McCain was born in Panama to U.S.-citizen parents while his father, a Navy admiral, was stationed in the Central American country.

Obama claims a birth in Honolulu, HI to a U.S.-citizen mother and British-citizen father who later became a Kenyan citizen by virtue of that nation’s declared independence from Great Britain in December 1963.

Both of Judy’s 2008 lawsuits were dismissed without oral argument.

In his 2014 filing, Judy v. Obama, 14-9396, Judy claimed that because Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” and therefore constitutionally ineligible to serve as president, the defendants deprived him of his rights under the aforementioned federal statutes, acting “as a cartel,” and resulting in significant financial damage to his 2012 presidential campaign.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution contains three requirements for the nation’s chief executive: that he must have resided 14 years within the country; attained at least 35 years of age at the time he is sworn in; and that he be a “natural born Citizen.”

The Framers did not define in the Constitution their understanding of the meaning of “natural born Citizen,” but Founding Fathers Alexander Hamilton and John Jay expressed in their writings their belief that the president and commander-in-chief of the military must have sole allegiance to the new nation they helped to form.

Judy has often made the point that while the president must be a “natural born Citizen,” U.S. senators and representatives were required by the Framers of the Constitution to be simply “citizens.”

A number of U.S. Supreme Court cases have touched on the “natural born Citizen” clause, with one, Minor v. Happersett, opining in the majority decision that it was “never doubted” that a person born in the United States to U.S.-citizen parents meets that standard. The court was unsure as to whether or not those born in the United States to foreign-citizen parents could be considered “citizens,” although the focus of the case was on voting rights for women rather than “natural born” or other forms of citizenship.

Judy contends that nothing less than a person born in the U.S. to citizen parents is a “natural born Citizen.”

On April 27, 2011, the White House posted what it said was a PDF image of Obama’s long-form birth certificate obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). Within 24 hours, however, experts declared it a forgery on the record, eventually prompting a criminal investigation commissioned by then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio.

In August 2011, Arpaio acceded to the wishes of 242 of his constituents who signed a petition requesting an investigation so that they could be assured that their votes in the 2012 presidential election would not be disenfranchised.

One of Arpaio’s volunteer posses undertook the initial analysis of the image, expecting to disprove the claims that it was not genuine. However, lead investigator and former detective Mike Zullo was forced to inform Arpaio several days later that the group could not reasonably say that the image was not suspect.

The investigation therefore continued.  On March 1, 2012, Zullo gave the first of what would ultimately be three press conferences in which he stated that probable cause existed to believe that the long-form birth certificate image is a “computer-generated forgery.”

Also declared fraudulent was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, which had been sent by the Selective Service System (SSS) to an unknown number of citizens requesting it through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

At the second presser on July 17, 2012, Zullo reported that the probable cause standard that forgery had been committed was surmounted based on the evidence gathered to that time. Arpaio concluded the press conference by stating that the forgery of a sitting president’s personal documentation posed a “national security threat.”

Inexplicably, neither the press, Congress, nor the FBI would investigate.

At the final press conference on December 15, 2016, Zullo demonstrated that “nine points of forgery” had been identified as having been electronically lifted and placed on the Obama long-form image as it was created on a computer. He additionally revealed that two forensic analysts on different continents approaching the image from different disciplines agreed that the birth certificate image posted on the White House website could not possibly have come from a real, paper document.

Zullo reported that the nine points of forgery were taken from an existing Hawaii birth certificate issued by the HDOH within several weeks of Obama’s claimed birth date of August 4, 1961 and that Zullo had held the paper document in his hands after was provided to him by its owner, Johanna Ah’Nee.

Although Judy’s 2014 case, based on alleged civil rights violations and violations of federal anti-trust acts, had been dismissed by the Utah District Court and Tenth District Court of Appeals after allowing him to proceed in forma pauperis, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor denied him that status, thereby stopping the case in its tracks in early October 2015.

Without recourse, Judy abandoned his efforts until Zullo announced the new revelations at the December 2016 presser.

At that point, Judy believed that the new and credible evidence should be submitted to the court given that federal anti-trust laws allow the inclusion of evidence alleging criminal activity within a civil suit.  Therefore, he refiled his case with the U.S. District Court in Utah in late January of this year.

On April 10, Judge Ted Stewart of the District Court dismissed Judy’s petition to reopen without requiring the defendants to submit a response, after which Judy appealed to the Tenth Circuit and the newly-seated U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch.

Gorsuch, a Tenth Circuit judge before his nomination to the Supreme Court, never issued a response, although the high court returned the certified mail card confirming that the filing was received.

Judy’s appeal to the Tenth Circuit resulted in its upholding of the District Court’s ruling that his case was “frivolous” with the caveat that it would review his petition in greater depth if he were to pay the customary court fee.

Upon receiving the appellate court’s order last month, Judy decided to try to raise the necessary $505 filing fee. He was successful and remitted it to the District Court on July 21.

In an interview on July 25, Judy told The Post & Email:

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.

In the Tenth Circuit’s “Order and Judgment” dated August 15, 2017, the three-judge panel contended that “Mr. Judy has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion” and thereby “affirmed” the lower court’s decision to dismiss it.

At the bottom of page 2, the judges stated, “Mr. Judy’s motion for relief from judgment was filed on January 27, 2017. Because this was more than two years after the judgment, we treat it as a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)… But a Rule 60(b) motion based on newly discovered evidence must be made ‘no more than a year after the entry of judgment…'”

Judy took issue with that reasoning, as his Motion to Re-open in 14-9396 was pending at the Supreme Court, signed and dated by him on February 4, 2016.

The Motion to Re-open was never docketed by the Supreme Court.  “SCOTUS returned it to me undocketed,” Judy told us on Saturday.  “SCOTUS has had two cracks on this:  the Motion to Re-open and the Gorsuch petition.  I thought they would want it first.  When SCOTUS wouldn’t docket it or reopen it, I turned back to the District Court.”

Judy also observed that an asterisk appearing to the right of “ORDER AND JUDGMENT”on page 1 refers the reader to a footnote, which states:

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

Of the statement, “This order and judgment is not binding precedent…” Judy said, “It kind-of said to me they know there are flaws in their judgement.”

Judy wishes to thank all who assisted him in raising the filing fee last month.

Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news.  She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.

19 Responses to "Obama Eligibility/Forgery Lawsuit Dismissed by Tenth Circuit"

  1. T.F. B0W   Tuesday, August 22, 2017 at 10:54 AM

    Cody Judy has filed in the 10th Circuit a petition for rehearing en banc. Years ago, when the 10th Circuit first affirmed the district court’s dismissal (and finding of frivolousness), Judy made a similar filing, and no judge then voted to rehear the case. The same will happen here.

    Judy’s latest filing is interesting. Judy does not explain why the one-year limit should not apply to him. Rather, Judy accuses the court of treason, and says it based its ruling on Obama’s skin color. It is easy to predict that these arguments will not prevail.

  2. Cody Robert Judy   Monday, August 21, 2017 at 11:11 AM

    Good Morning America❤ Are you Ready for the Great American Eclipse? #Eclipse2017 #Eclipse #MAGA #Utpol #Birther #TenthCircuit @GMA https://t.co/q7hyKaU6Hs


    Sure Appreciate the acknowledgments, comments, and opinions expressed here towards the sovereignty of our United States of America; and preserving America’s Choice in the Office if President according to our Standard of Law referencing and respecting the testimony of nature amd nature’s God.

    While man-made laws conflict with nature’s laws in this respect , we Birthers stand on solid ground while others will surely have doubts and with doubts penalties surely are asked for and are required by those opposing Nature and our Creator.

  3. ELmo   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 6:03 PM

    Cody Robert Judy,
    You’re a true patriot who is to be lauded for your dedication to the cause of justice.

    The points you make are valid in my mind. However, in my opinion it’s over. The die is unfortunately cast and the precedent will forever stand regarding the NBC requirement (only a miracle can change that at this point IMO). OUR Constitution has been shredded by a bunch of corrupt Politicians, Judges, and Media personnel. It has effectively been amended by the very representatives that vowed to uphold it. They amended the Constitution in total disregard of the Article V provisions. The complicity of the Government and the Press in this fraudulent and illegal act (and subsequent cover-up) is beyond the imagination of most Americans.

    The courts will never overturn Obama at this point. They (the courts) have spent the last eight years avoiding and covering the issue; they are not now going to “drag it out from the closet” and throw the nation into turmoil by overturning his (Obama’s) presidency and declaring everything he signed for the last eight years “null and void”, expose themselves (the courts) as well as the entire Congress and American Press as abettors before the entire World.

    That’s just not going to happen. You fought the good fight and fought harder than most of us probably expending a good deal of your own resources in the process. Bravo !! You deserve our thanks and our admiration for your efforts. You could not have done more. But I think you will see no more from the courts or the President on this issue. We all need to accept the fact that corruption has prevailed here and expending more of your money and effort will not put the toothpaste back in the tube. We should all be aghast at what has occurred and efforts should continue to expose the truth. But the Courts, the Congress, the DNC, the RNC and the MSM are not going to help convict themselves of the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. I think you are correct that both McCain and Obama were ineligible in 2008 and a deal was made at that point (by the major parties) to go forward anyway – (they deemed the process to far along by the time it came to the attention of the public) They decided “The Constitution be damned”.

    You Have lived up to the standard of our Patriot Fathers who pledged “their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor”.
    You Have Fought Well – Thank You for Your Courage and Your Dedication to the Spirit of American Freedom May God Bless You!
    May God Bless America!

  4. T.F. B0W   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 4:05 PM

    Plaintiffs cannot pick and choose which rules should apply to them; the judges were only applying the well-settled rules already in place.

    A suit is frivolous if it has no basis in law or fact. Judy’s beliefs about natural-born citizenship did not support any possible claim under 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, the Sherman Act, or the Clayton Act. If Judy believed these laws somehow applied to the 2012 election, it was his burden to demonstrate how, and he failed to do that.

  5. Ed Sunderland   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 3:31 PM

    I appreciate the work of Cody. It is long and laborious to put together a case knowing you are right and you face a wall of left wing cowards and communists in the –and I hate to call it judiciary– that favor criminal conduct from the left wing and the Obama/Soeotoro administration. Not only that, the republicans who should be standing up for you and your efforts to seek justice are all raging cowards who bow to the scornful eye of Tapper, Maddow or Matthews.

    Cody is right, judges acted as attorneys have dictated and still dictate law when it came to the Obama agenda or those seeking relief for the criminal acts of Obama/Soetoto.

    I’ve taken a different tact with predictable results after a lot of work charging the DNC and RNC and all their candidates as not being properly qualified to the Texas Supreme Court where they refused to hear our case. It was not thrown out they just wanted the deck clear so the RNC leadership, AG, SOS, and others can hook up at Tomatillos on 1/2 price Margarita night and yuck it up about the Texas voters they hosed without feeling guilty.

    Thanks for the work Cody. I understand what it takes and from civilians I respect the work. We should not be rebuked for trying and we should not have to be attorneys to file a suit. That is exactly why the citizen grand jury was designed. This is why we need it back.

  6. Rattlerjake   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 2:13 PM

    There is only one thing to learn from this whole case and that is that there is NO justice in the justice system the system is stacked in favor of those who run it. The courts should not be able to pick and choose which cases they want to hear. I’m interested in hearing what it is that they consider frivolous about this suit!

  7. Dirk   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 1:37 PM

    Dismissed with prejudice. The matter is settled. Argue intent and technically until the cows come home. It matters not.

  8. T.F. BOW   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 1:08 PM

    The Tenth Circuit rejected Judy’s case because his motion was tardy; the Tenth Circuit did not rule on the meaning of natural-born citizenship. But every court that has addressed the issue has said that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship, and some courts have gone further and expressly rejected the reading of Minor proposed by Judy (and Laity) — notwithstanding the calls of the dissatisfied litigants to imprison or execute the judges who rule against them.

    There are more than two hospitals in Hawaii, but no hospital in the United States can now disclose who was born there without violating federal law. For example, no hospital has claimed to be the birthplace of the current president.

  9. jeffrey harrison   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 12:55 PM

    Several years ago while attending Constitutional lectures from Mr. William Taylor Reil of
    Pennsylvania, he would state, “be careful in who’s play box you’re in”. In other words,
    “be careful and know the rules…”.

  10. Charles   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 12:48 PM

    America’s expensive legal “injustice system” is run by lawyers for judges and lawyers, and the average American cannot afford feeding the courts and lawyers with cash while waiting for the legal system to actually give any American due process.

    Just to get a hearing in court has become a luxury only millionaires can afford when you have to take your case to the Supreme Court.

    Local and states courts seemingly can’t get the job done..,

    Obtaining true Justice across the land without bankrupting an American Citizen is “injustice”, in my humble opinion.

    Cody Robert Judy, you fought a hard fight but being poor “buys” you and millions of others like us no justice at all. And it shouldn’t if America were truly a moral society. But it’s run by lawyers and judges…..

    Now we know what slaves got for their existence: no rights, no vote, no Justice, no….. Somehow, We Americans have got to change the status quo.

  11. Cort Wrotnowski   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 11:31 AM

    and it is just my opinion that the approach may need to be rethought. This may require some stepping back in the sense that one has to build the case for prosecution by referring to the history of past prosecution. One small piece that is the most easily proven needs to be the starting point. One off the wall example is to press an investigation into the ongoing deceit by the two hospitals in Hawaii. I am of the view they can no longer hide behind a veil of denial. Getting them to fess up that Obama was not born in their hospitals will strengthen the charges of fraud. Also, I would think that the cold case posse’s analysis would carry weight.

  12. T.F. B0W   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 10:56 AM

    Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit too early, and Cody Judy filed his motion too late. It is unsurprising that the courts would apply the laws as written, and not as desired by the plaintiffs who didn’t follow the rules.

    Van Irion also filed two eligibility lawsuits: he was sanctioned thousands of dollars in one because it was frivolous, so he quickly dismissed the other before being sanctioned again.

    If Judy — or anyone else — believes Obama has committed a crime, then the next step would be to convince a prosecutor to initiate criminal proceedings. The lack of success on this front by previous efforts perhaps is an indication of something.

  13. Robert Laity   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 10:44 AM

    To clarify, the court in Minor said that an NBC is “one born in the US to parents who are [both] US Citizens themselves”. The very same definition found in the Law of Nations (Article 1, Sec. 8 of the USConst). The original French: “Les naturels ou indigenes sont ceux qui sont ne de le pays de PARENTS CitoyenS”, NBCs are those born in a country to parents who are both citizens. The decision in Minor, more then being a “Majority” decision, was unanimous. The court expressed “doubt” as to whether the other classes of “Citizen” who did not have two US Citizen parents or birth in the US to one citizen parent, met the standard of being a “Natural Born Citizen”. NBC is not tantamount to being just a “Citizen”. ALL Natural Born Citizens are citizens. All citizens are NOT NBCs. The 10th circuit has become the most recent court to be non-feasant,malfeasant and complicit with espionage during war time. Misprision of Treason and Espionage during war time subject the Judges themselves to execution,if convicted, under 10 USC. The case is NOT frivolous in the least.

  14. Philo Vance   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 9:53 AM

    Was that Klayman or Van Iron?

  15. Chris Farrell   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 7:36 AM

    It’s just my opinion, but probably the most exciting thing for Obama is having Justices act as his attorneys, and his attorneys show up for comments? That’s got be cheaper!”

    Yes indeed! I took a bus down to Tallahassee and sat in the courtroom when the judge, I think his name was Terry Lewis and I only remember that if I’m right because it rhymes with ‘Jerry Lewis’–both clowns–basically ruled that Larry Klayman’s case could not proceed because Obama was not yet the official nominee of the Democrat party, though by the time the Democrat Convention would establish Obama as their official nominee the window of opportunity for Mr. Klayman’s case to prevent Obama’s name from being placed on the ballot in the then upcoming presidential election would already be closed.

    I most probably didn’t state that correctly. Talk to Atty. Larry Klayman. It was a travesty of justice indicative of an elitist faction controlling the court…, and what a miserable freaking bus ride both ways!

  16. Cody Robert Judy   Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 1:13 AM

    It’s just my opinion, but probably the most exciting thing for Obama is having Justices act as his attorneys, and his attorneys show up for comments? That’s got be cheaper!

    I’ve been trying to think what that’s called?

    Oh yeah, a Default.

    What is it called when Justices make excuses for defendants if Crimes whose statutes have not run out?

    Complicity, Misprison of Felony, Corruption?

    What is it called when Justices weight the Balance of Justice, and call the Qualifications of the Office of President in the US Constitution “frivilous”?

    Treason of their Oaths of Office and Bad Behaviour comes to my mind.

  17. Rick Damon   Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 8:47 PM

    Mr. Judy apparently does not understand that a Motion to Re-open a case does not re-open it unless the Motion is granted.

    In fact, the Supreme Court rules make no provision for re-opening an appeal which has been denied and closed. The only recourse to the denial of an appeal is to file a Motion for Reconsideration, which Mr. Judy did on June 14, 2015. It was denied on October 5, 2015 and the case was closed by SCOTUS on October 8, 2015. Since there is no provision in the SCOTUS rules for filing a Motion to Re-open, Mr. Judy’s February 4, 2016 Motion was never docketed.

    So even if we accept the argument that his SCOTUS appeal kept the case alive, Mr. Judy still missed the filing deadline for a Motion for Relief of Judgment by more than three months.

  18. T.F. B0W   Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 4:16 PM

    This order is not binding precedent (for anyone other than Judy) because the precedent has already been set: a motion for relief of judgment must be filed within a year of the entry of judgment. Judy filed his latest motion well over two years after the 10th Circuit had already affirmed the dismissal. Judy may believe that another motion that he mailed in a closed proceeding in another court somehow changes the rules, but the 10th Circuit does not.

    And Judy did not file Zullo’s evidence with the district court, as Zullo has not released his evidence to anyone.

    Judy did not file an eligibility challenge against Obama in 2008. Judy did file a challenge against McCain, but that was dismissed because Judy failed to provide the court with a valid address. By the time Judy got around to fixing that mistake, McCain had lost so the lawsuit was moot.

  19. bendore   Saturday, August 19, 2017 at 3:48 PM

    This ruling was issued with Prejudice therefore it is definitely binding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.