Ultimately, Constitutionality becomes a political issue - are the parties involved willing to uphold the Constitution or not? That includes the People who vote. It's not surprising that Constitutionally ineligible voters (i.e., non-citizens) would vote for a Constituitionally ineligible candidate.
However, what was lacking this time was clear evidence and fortitude to demand it. All the other states could have used their Constitutional power of full faith and credit to demand that Hawaii share their public records. Only Arizona tried and failed. Perhaps if other states joined, Hawaii might have been forced to comply or Congress forced to act?
In any case, precedent can't overturn the Constitution. That's why we have weak presidencies and strong presidencies. It depends on the boldness of the President and the meekness of Congress and the Courts. That's where we are now, BTW, with meek and weak leaders in Congress, and a confused man in charge of the Supreme Court.
> In any case, precedent can’t overturn the Constitution.
Very well put and I agree. However precedent can allow people to circumvent the Constitution with greater ease.
” . . .demand that Hawaii share their public records . . ..”
Irrespective of BHObama’s place of birth, the fact remains that his father (assuming the Kenyan was his father), was not ever a citizen of the U.S.A.
Is Jindal U.S.A.-born? If yes, were his parents U. S. citizens at the time of his birth?