Monday, June 22, 2015

Developing: US Supreme Court Did Not Deny 
Cody Judy's Obama Article II Ineligibility Petition

As reported here Cody Judy's Obama Article II ineligibility case was distributed for the June 18th SCOTUS Conference.

Today the docket was updated with following:

Jun 22 2015 - The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until July 13, 2015, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.

UPDATE: Excerpts from Cody Judy's response;

Todays' U.S. SUPREME COURT 'ORDERS' list might be the UNIVERSE SHATTERING EVIDENCE heard around the world! Today a Case under consideration by the United States Supreme Court 'failed' the death grip of what is called the 'Dead-List' of the United States Supreme Court. It's never happened before with a Case that dealt with the Eligibility Questions presented by Mr. Judy a Candidate for President in '08 and '12 and now 2016 asserting Campaign Damages for the unanswered Obama ineligibility question when it comes to the United States Constitution's demand for a 'natural born Citizen'.

Judy v. Obama 14-9396 was placed on the "pending orders" list because Judy did not meet the standard for 'informa pauperis'. However, there was some confusion about it at first. If you look at the PDF filing of the Court Orders you'll see just below Judy's case, in a specific order(s) spelling out just that description in Cases 14-8082 and 14-9797 which state clearly, "The Motions to proceed informa pauperis are denied" 
In Case 14-8082 just above Judy v. Obama is states for that case: "The Motions of Petitioners for reconsideration of orders denying leave to proceed informa pauperis are denied" 
Judy v. Obama 14-9396 is then listed with no 'specifications' of pending orders. 
Next comes the Case 14-9797 'The leave to proceed informa pauperis by the petitioners is denied..' 
There are four other cases also listed with no specific 'ORDER' detailed next to their cases, leaving us really not knowing what the orders are about for sure, or what they might include although all four have had informa pauperis rulings on them and they are listed on their docket reports already. 
Mr. Judy said regarding his Case, "Well, I did file a Motion for leave to file my petition 'informa pauperis' in Judy v. Obama 12-5276, 2012 and my case or Writ of Certiorari Petition was just "Denied" and later I filed for a Review and that was Denied also, verifying that Informa Pauperis standing was granted but the Case was Denied Cert. No where on that Docket do you see a 'disposition of the multiple Motions' I filed in that Case either. This tells us the Court doesn't necessarily feel the need to formally rule on Motions before the Court, or they do so and do not print it on the Docket, as the Case in 2012 is Evidence of.

Judy's full response here.


- Source. Hat tip CDR Kerchner(Ret) -