Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Complaint Joinder LTR: The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission

Cody Robert Judy
Federal Election Commission Candidate & Committee Registration Number:
P20003372 FEC Candidate number 0003372.
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign
3031 So. Ogden Ave. Suite #2
Ogden, UT. 84403
- - - -
The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission
New Hampshire Legislative Building
33 North State Street
Concord, New Hampshire 03301-6328
(603) 271-3321
- - - -
Hearing is scheduled Friday at 2 p.m. in Room 307 of the New Hampshire Legislative Office Building, and
Cody Robert Judy-D Candidate for President, joining Taitz (Petitioner) demands removal of Obama from the New Hampshire Primary ballot.

On October 11,2011 William M. Gardner, New Hampshire Secretary of State, issued a statement regarding the importance of the New Hampshire Primary stating "It is probably the most important political decision each of us makes because our choice can affect the lives and happiness of ourselves and our children for years into our future."

Regarding the vital role of smaller states he elaborated New Hampshire’s primary since 1916 is first for a reason and said, "Worse yet, if a national primary was held, or if the role of small states was eliminated, only the very rich or famous candidates would be able to put on the major campaigns needed for victory or to exceed expectations".

One vital way that we preserve our democracy is to have an election system that allows for the long-standing American dream to come about that just about anyone can grow up to be President of the United States, and that our boys and girls going to school now could feel that our Constitutional Qualifications for President held in the U.S. Constitution are just as affective preserving their chances in the future as it did in1787.

The keys of our Commander-In-Chief are exclusively rewarded to only those who are Natural Born Citizens, or who were Citizens at the time of the adoption of our Constitution in 1787. The distinction of Citizen and Natural Born Citizen clearly made within the Constitution itself. The only other requirement is that of being 35 yrs of age and 14 years a resident within the U.S., which I do hereby present myself as to being qualified for as I was born in Idaho Falls, Idaho in 1965 to parents who were also generationally natural born citizens.

In 2008 I ran as a Write-In Candidate for President and filed suit in the Federal Court of Las Vegas, Nevada against Sen. John McCain and included Sen. Barack Obama in that law suit Judy v. McCain. I am familiar with the 'partisan politics' represented and the malign of our Constitution's requirements of Qualification for President into the slippery slope of racism which threatens to divide our country.

With that said, I represent the same fortitude and resolve that our Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land; our United States intact, and the Qualification demands as well in tact by the fact that nothing has been remitted or repealed by the required two thirds of both Houses of Congress enumerated in Article V, as to the Presidents Qualifications in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5.

To this I witness by the power of my testimony, with standing as a Presidential Candidate that Barack Obama's own public release of his long form birth certificate, prohibits his running for President, or his occupation of said office even at this moment of time. He is not a Natural Born Citizen, which even by United States Supreme Court precedent in Minor v. Happersett acknowledges the definition of being born in the United States to citizen parents.

I acknowledge herein my desire to enter into the New Hampshire Primary as a Candidate for President, by said entry date of the 3rd Friday of November, 2011 upon the confirmation by The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission that the Constitution's requirements are still in effect, and Barack Obama is prohibited from the New Hampshire Primary as a qualified candidate.

If this matter is extended by lawful decision, I herein also request that an extension of my entry fee of $1,000 be extended for the decision, or in lieu of merit are extended until after the Primary if necessary. For it is my only desire to enter a constitutionally legal Primary, and that such would clearly uphold the U.S. Constitution, in a Presidential Candidates Qualification, is reasonable expectation.

If the matter, by your decision, is to allow Barack Obama on the Primary Ballot of New Hampshire when he clearly by his own represented record is not a natural born citizen qualified under the Constitution's guidelines and Supreme Court Case precedent, then of course standards so long upheld and extolled by New Hampshire's own Secretary of State are null and void, as well the reputation held in high esteem of New Hampshire's Primary since 1916, nearly 100 years of its States tradition.

By this I adjoin my complaint to Mrs. Orly Taitz complaint by my own accord and witness herein freely and by my own liberty.

Cody Robert Judy /s/ Cody Robert Judy Dated : November 16th 2011
Democrat Candidate for President 2012
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign


  1. There is no statement in the Minor vs Happersett case that a Natural Born Citizen requires two citizen parents. Only a statement that there were doubts as to whether a person who was simply born in the USA without US parents is also a Natural Born Citizen. Then the ruling said that it did not have to resolve those doubts. In other words, it did not decide. If you say: "most people thought X and some people thought Y, but we do not have to resolve this"---that is not a decision.

    So the Minor vs Happersett case is not a precedent. What is a precedent is the Wong Kim Ark case, which was later than Minor and hence would have overturned it if Minor was a ruling (and it wasn't). and the Wong Kim Ark case ruled six to two (one not voting) that EVERY child born in the USA except for the children of foreign diplomats is Natural Born. Since then courts and legal scholars have stated that a person who is both Natural Born and a citizen is, duh, a Natural Born Citizen.

    Obama is one because of his birth in Hawaii, for which the evidence is overwhelming.

  2. Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
    This case concerned Mrs. Happersett an original suffragette who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year wrote the majority opinion in which he stated, “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that”. At common law with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves upon their birth citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

    United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
    In this case, Wong Kim Ark the son of two resident Chinese aliens claimed U.S. Citizenship and was vindicated by the court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case, the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Based on the 14th Amendment however, the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen” as anyone who was born in the U.S.A. under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court gave a novel interpretation to jurisdiction and thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.), but it did not extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen”.

    To define a term is to indicate the category or class of things, which it signifies. In this sense, the Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

    Hence, every U.S. Citizen must accept this definition or categorical designation, and fulfill his constitutional duties accordingly.

    There is no member of Congress, no judge of the Federal Judiciary, no elected or appointed official in Federal or State government, and certainly no Candidate for Federal Office who has the right to use any other definition and if he/she does, their action is not only unlawful but it should be a BIG RED SIGN that tells everyone they are causing the Constitution harm and therefore could in no way be trusted to fullfill an oath for the Constitution.

    It is a fruitless argument to designate someone who has duel citizenship at birth as a natural born citizen. Furthermore, it is defies all logic at protection at the highest level of our Government from the natural aligences of birth (nature) and parental (nurture)influences.