On appeal, it’s not clear if they are supposed to name the original defandant or if the state is put on the defensive. It was the SoS’s decision, but the original case was filed against the candidate, not the SoS. I doubt the judge will have a problem with it.
I think it’s a mistake for any of these plaintiffs to enter any of Obama’s alleged birth certificates as evidence. Keep the burden of proof on Obama. There’s no probative evidence to show where he was born and who his parents are and what their citizenship was at the time of birth. The only legal precdent is the Minor definition of NBC, which precludes the children of foreign nationals. Then they can point to the divorce records and Barack Sr.’s immigration file.
Why do you consider the divorce records and immigration file to be of more value as "probative evidence" than the "alleged birth certificates"?
And a second point...isn't the burden of proof already on Obama according to Georgia statutes?