What would be wrong with having the Hawaii DOH (or whatever State DOH, this law being designed to not be a bill of attainder applicable to just one individual) send the form they deem to be proof of birth within that State, and that fulfills the requirements specified by Congress, directly to the SOS of the State certifying the qualification to be on the ballot?
Why would that not be sufficient to establish what it is said the law was designed to establish?
As we’ve seen in the case of Obama, even if the COLB is legitimate, it doesn’t necessarily establish that he was indeed born in Hawaii.
There’s probably a separate issue here, too. We need to establish not only that the candidate was born in the United States (or as a US citizen, and some proposed laws may fall short by not recognizing that a person can be born overseas to US parents and never have any citizenship but US citizenship, and thus also be native-born), but also that there is no good reason to believe that citizenship meets Constitutional muster and has not been invalidated since then.
From what I’ve read, Obama even if born in the US may still not be eligible to the office of President by virtue of (a) having been born to a father who wasn’t by anybody’s definition a US citizen, or (b) having been legally adopted by Soetoro (and given Indonesian citizenship?)
Or both.
So here we have a candidate who may be ineligible to the office for not just one, but up to three separate reasons.