Besides Irion’s stipulation that Obama was born in Hawaii and the BC that he entered into evidence?
One lawyer stipulated Obama is born in Hawaii, the other never challenges Obama’s birthplace, and the third lawyer invalidates all her evidence through her incompetence.
With all that, I don’t think the judge is going to spend much time pondering Obama’s birthplace. Lets not forget the standard of proof is much lower than a criminal trial - the judge merely had to believe that the evidence indicated that it was “likely” that Obama was born in Hawaii. It would be easy to reach that level.