In this case we have a judge who made a decision to dismiss a case because he saw this "government document" on the internet. It was presented to him as a valid document and it influenced his decision to dismiss."
That's right. That ludicrous decision by that judge was based in part on an image found on the internet. Beyond ridiculous. The faux short form colb has never been entered into the court record with any of these eligibility challenges.
No, that document had absolutely no impact on that particular judge's decision. That judge - Land I believe, granted defendant's motion dismiss for one reason - plaintiff's failed to meet the requisite obligation of standing. That's it.
Land then goes on to editorialize about the case generally - as judges almost always do, irrespective of granting MTD - in what is known as "orbiter dicta" which is Latin legal phrase translated as "said by the way". Dicta has absolutely no precedential value, at all. That's why it's called editorializing.