What you have stated is the *argument* — but there is no existing law that states who is responsible for performing the constitutional test. And because of that, the whole “standing” thing is invalid because there is no standing possible for anyone since there is no law mandating that the constitutional test be applied.
This convoluted thinking is exactly what's wrong with having lawyers, who twist and squirm everything, running the country.
In a sane world, where rights are sacred and protected, the judge would have said, since you did not produce the evidence of your qualifications, your votes will not be counted in the commonwealth of Penn.
We are nye on to an oligarchy in a country where powerful people can do and get away with anything, while their minions and sycophants explain to commoners how lucky we are to have such great people lead us.