As I have been advocating on this thread, I see this as the way to go: instead of going so far as to ask a court to declare Obama as ineligible, it seems to me it would be better to focus on getting the court to find that the process to "fully qualify" the president-elect -- ANY president-elect -- is not sufficient to enforce the Constitution's eligibility requirements. And, therefore, the Congress must fix the process.
Part of making that argument is, in fact, the fact that Congress held hearings on McCain's eligibility. IOW, they demonstrated that they have some understanding that they have a duty to enforce constitutional standards on this point. But at the same time, their failure to hold hearings on Obama's eligibility, when he had an equal question based on the fact that his father was a British citizen, demonstrates Congress omission of review was arbitrary and capricious.
The court need to find Obama ineligible. It could simply find that the process doesn't safeguard the constitutional standard. The court could say in dicta that holding a hearing on the eligibility of a person born to two American citizens, but not on a person born to an American citizen and a foreign national, demonstrates that there is no coherent policy, and that this lack of procedure should be addressed by a law that would then be subject to judicial review.
The big plus would be if the court in this case grants Kerchner the ability to move forward with discovery.