Professional Documents
Culture Documents
v.
1
1-Appellant/Petitioners Opening Brief
Statement of the Case
Civil Rights Anti-Trust Law Suit citing New Evidence had been
Candidate in the Party. The District Court denied the Motions and the
Review
1- This case began July 7th, 2014 and was appealed to both the Tenth
Circuit in Case No. 14-4136 and appealed to the Supreme Court of the
2
a. The Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio conducted a final
3-Statement of Issues
a. First Issue
This case was brought to the Court under the authority of both Civil
but also under the authority of the Sherman and Clayton Acts of
upon the Judge to report the action to the Prosecutor for relief.
United States v. Borden Co., 347 U.S. 514 (1954)
Section 15 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 25, charges the United
sort personal to the plaintiff, Beegle v. Thomson, 138 F.2d 875, 881
(1943). The private injunction action, like the treble damage action
3
under 4 of the Act, supplements Government enforcement of the
antitrust laws; but it is the Attorney General and the United States
4
OFA) conspired or joined in illegal actions in conspiracy to elect a
form birth certificate and Rep. Nancy Pelosis signature on two forms
the same day, one to Hawaii and one to the other 49 states that
to the ends of the goal or sale are exactly what constitutes a cabal
regarded there was no doubt those born in the Country to its Citizens
5
were the [natural born Citizens] bearing no other allegiance and
inserted doubts to those who were not [born in the U.S. to Citizen
Barack Obama was never qualified for the Office of the President
on the Motions and signing the ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE so the issue
could be tried for Petitioner the Court became a party to the criminal
6
The Legislative Branches directives are blunted with the administration
Some Democrats site in Valerie Jarett and many others including Hillary
the New York Times, Wallstreet Journal, and Washington Post and most
and the Court by law has a duty to hear objections and evidence, and
Mr. Judy should be allowed to bring the issue to Trial, one in which the
7
Mr. Judy is the only Candidate who has never conceded the race on
acting in the Public Arena as a Candidate against those who were not
qualified in his own Republican Party, such as Sen. Ted Cruz (born in a
and Sen. Marco Rubio (born of foreign parents States side), and won,
the Courts have continually denied Mr. Judy the positive rewards or
binding the Democratic Party he is a part of. This has given rewards to
(since 2000 at least nine (9) attempts were made to remove or change
with its silence. Thus the presumption of innocence of the Courts non-
affect the Election it ought to be on the side of Justice and not the side
in the race for President include the ability to run a fair and equal race
under the law and according to the rules. That is to say the
8
Constitution protects individual rights against an individual in the face
That means that Mr. Judy as a Presidential Candidate has the Civil
imposes by her will the cover-up of Fraud and violation of Mr. Judys
Mr. Judy has a right to stop under the umbrella of the USC, liberty, and
especially when alleged crimes, facts, and evidence support Mr. Judy. Is
it Rep. Nancy Pelosis position or wealth that the Court admires over
the U.S. Constitution and Justice? How does her excuse for Fraud give
her the right to write a-new the qualifications for the Office of the
President? Shall she write a new constitution next? Is the Court ruled
Section 1, C-5 has all but been removed by the conspiracy to illegally
9
altar the qualifications for President for those so [naturalized] without a
females of age the right to vote, the Standard of [natural born Citizen]
Parents, the only three criteria considered, in soil, mother, and father
b. Second Issue
Court Rules afford Mr. Judy has a right to object to Mr. Obamas
the "National Nomination" of the particular party once the Party has
decided who will represent them in the General Election. Now to get an
2008 and compare that with the Elections of 2004 and 2000. What did
10
Constitutionally Qualified under the Constitution with the missing
language as follows:
Step 1: Receive the votes of the majority of party delegates from the
50 states.
Step 2: The delegates votes are tallied and certified at the partys
national convention.
Nomination, the Chair of the National Party Convention also signs off
John Kerry and John Edwards (2004) both had the following identical
language:
This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice
President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the
provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen
11
the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic
Nomination for Barack Obama and Joe Biden carried this language:
This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice
President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the
change from the norm and a cooperating allegiance under the U.S
Constitution and its provisions. Now, with the state of Hawaii unwilling
to qualify Mr. Obama as a [natural born Citizen] qualified under the U.S.
12
unqualified. The first problem is Hawaii State Law requires the
Please see the next four provided exhibits supporting this claim.
13
Hawaii 2004 Certification of Kerry/Edwards
14
15
Hawaii Certification of Gore/Lieberman
16
17
And finally the National Certifications of Nancy Pelosi for Hawaii and the 49
other States
18
Now if nationally recognized Parties have no duty towards qualifying a
presidential Candidate who can serve under the provisions of the U.S.
for those who are actually elected and should know better from past
Further:
rules is alleged, the court must hear the facts and determine the question.
From p. 339 of the same Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure concerning who
One who is not a member of the party making nominations cannot object to
made within a designated time after such papers are filed, or within a certain
number of days before election. Mr. Judy took part in Ballot Challenges in
2012 in New Hampshire and Georgia which would it way up to the U.S.
Supreme Court in Judy v. Obama 12-5276. And, after the time for filing
19
which no objections were filed and which is regular in form cannot be
attacked. At all events such objection should be made before the election, for
if not so made the legal authority of a convention will in the absence of fraud
2008 and 2012 which undoubtedly carried forth into the 2016 Elections with
a loss for Secretary Hillary Clinton. If it had been known that there was a
Old Post Office and spared Obama further legal hostility after he produced a
fraudulent long form birth certificate, would Mr. Trump have had the support
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANqhpkkVH8s
however could be so great that Mr. Trump could face a loss in 2020 if he
decides to run for re-election just as easily as Hillary Clinton was handed a
loss in 2016. Mr. Judy in 2020 could be elected in bring the Fraud to Justice.
These would also be rewards or the fruits of justice. The Court can decide
what is going to happen politically in the arena, however it can decide to try
20
What this means is FRAUD is a great qualifier for the action to be heard in
Candidate for President in the eyes of the Court, who would/or/could/ and
considerations of FRAUD upon his person, upon in general the elections, and
of course upon all voting citizens in the United States of America as they are
This is also the way in which the Democratic Party's Democratic National
American People's U.S. Constitution in the qualifications for the Office of the
President in a cartelish criminal action with and in league with OFA, in the
was qualified, and why so few people had the ability to challenge this. Cody
Robert Judy's Action in Court took on not only a Civil Rights Claim but also a
claim that forbids Cartel Monopolies in the actions of fraud of two or more
Corporations known as the Sherman and Clayton Acts. The Fraud statutes of
limitations range from 3-4 years, however this is based upon when the
evidence was conceived and with new evidence which was not known the
Minus these Congressional Acts on some legal grounds they have never been
applied in the standard of the race and voters as a commodity two parties
are in the race for based upon the Courts inability to grab a precedent case
21
where a Presidential Candidate has challenged another Presidential
Candidate for nine years in the fraud of his identification and the fraud upon
the election, that caused in unfair and unequal trading of votes according to
the price per vote, the Civil Rights Claims for a qualified candidate for
President still apply and are not devastated nor is the identity and
c-Third Issue
c. The cover-up of originality has its authors dealing in fraud, both upon
the American Voters as well as Mr. Judy as a Candidate. Mr. Obama was
never a [natural born Citizen] and Kenya, not the United States is
of United States at birth, why would it not matter who the father was or
doubts that [Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents] was a [natural born
22
Citizen]. Why would it be defined in [naturalization Acts or Laws]?
the marine policy and procedure manual in the movie A Few Good
mother and father who are U.S. Citizens is a [natural born Citizen].
There is no doubt.
Minor v. Happersett incited the Legislative Branches duty for the
Constitution held. That while a citizen who could not vote, the 14th
and privileges which are granted to some but not to all. She had no
23
The 19th Amendment thusly ratified in 1920 laid an equal burden
who cant vote, cant run for the office of the President of the United
mother who was a U.S. Citizen, but he still never did with his
Archives show a son born to Obama Sr. in 1961 which could only be
archives-show-a-son-was-born-to-obama-sr-in-1961-in-kenya/
Never before 1920 was a women able to run for President in a
she clearly would not have been able to even vote for herself. The
24
If a childs father was not qualified under the allegiance as a Citizen
the 19th Amendment was the mothers. The right of Americans in the
decide who was qualified and conversely who was not, after the
original [Citizens] who could not have possibly been [natural born
4- Do you think the district court applied the wrong law? If so, what
defendants were in default and had been served by 2 witnesses to the Court.
The Court then refused a Motion to serve again and based that decision on
what in its opinion was frivolous. Mr. Judy brought new evidence forward by
claims were not frivolous. The Court should have then been willing to admit
Rule 60 provides the requirements of new evidence and these were ignored.
9- Judy has brought to the Court evidence that is indeed new and was not
motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, the defendant
must show: "(1) the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) the failure to
learn of the evidence was not caused by lack of diligence; (3) the new
25
material to the principal issues involved; and (5) the new evidence would
granted." Hill, _ F.3d at _ (quoting United States v. Orr, 692 F.3d 1079, 1099
(10th Cir. 2012)) United States v. MacDonald, 779 F.2d 962, 964 (4th Cir.
1985) [or presumed conviction] added in relation to this Case. (To obtain a
new trial on the basis of after discovered evidence, that evidence must be
from the judgement of the Court that this is frivolous and wholly incredible
5. Did the district court incorrectly decide the facts? If so, what
facts?
Yes. The defendants were indeed served the Complaint and Summons mailed
to the Plaintiff Mr. Judy. The Court keeps track of everything mailed and
received even taking pictures of the envelopes received from the Plaintiff. Its
Yes. Mr. Judy brought New Evidence to the Court providing for a relief of
judgement and that evidence has the hard evidence and expert witness of
forgery.
26
Yes. Mr. Judy has rights to run a fair and equal race under the standard of the
U.S. Constitutions qualifications for the Office of the President and these
Yes. Mr. Obama was never qualified as a [natural born Citizen] ie. Born in the
U.S. to Citizen Parents: and OFA and the DNC collaborated as a cartel in
illegal actions to conspire against the qualifications for the Office of the
6. Did the court fail to consider important grounds for relief? If so,
what grounds?
Yes. The court basically denied any grounds Mr. Judy has with standing as a
Law. The Court denied the evidence submitted constituting Fraud from a
7. Do you feel that there are any other reasons why the district
I feel like the District Court has discriminated against me because I had a
public felony 25 years ago and that the denial of Constitutional Principles
have been sacrificed at the expense of the Courts own feelings, that nothing
good can come from a felon- even one who they claim by law was
a crime, the court has eliminated all witnesses by the standard none are
27
important, why are the witnesses to both discriminated by the Court only
after the default was recognized? Why did the Court wait until after the 20
answer? Its an underlying theme repeated again and again that to me does
Id like the Court administer Relief from Judgment that was incorrect. I would
like this Court to recognize evidence put forth in my Brief and do what it
reversing the lower courts stand against justice. By law in the Clayton Act the
Court can also provide me with legal counsel and assign that duty with which
9. Do you think the court should hear oral argument in this case? If
so, Why?
embarrassed with their usurpation across the whole Nation and Barack
illegally with the intent or desire to commit crime upon Americans. Its an
History corrected.
28
Date: May 4th, 2016 Signature- ____________________________
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
advocates for the agenda of former U.S. President Barack Obama. Executive
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit- Byron White United States Courthouse 1823 Stout Street,
29
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
the total number of pages exceeds 30, I certify that I have counted the
number of words and the total is _________, which is less than 13,000. I
30