A defendant has to consider whether Art III standing is going to be sufficient grounds in filing a motion to dismiss. There's no reason to play only one card when a self-authenticating document could help negate the legal claim against the defendant. McCain's legal team did NOT rely only on a legal-standing argument in his MTD. They addressed the merits of Hollander's eligibility claim. A birth certificate was not necessary or relevant to their response to the elibility question in the MTD. Obama probably wouldn't have had 74 lawsuits to contend with if he had filed a legal birth certificate as evidence in the first MTD.
“A defendant has to consider whether Art III standing is going to be sufficient grounds in filing a motion to dismiss. There’s no reason to play only one card when a self-authenticating document could help negate the legal claim against the defendant. McCain’s legal team did NOT rely only on a legal-standing argument in his MTD. They addressed the merits of Hollander’s eligibility claim. A birth certificate was not necessary or relevant to their response to the elibility question in the MTD. Obama probably wouldn’t have had 74 lawsuits to contend with if he had filed a legal birth certificate as evidence in the first MTD.”
I think you’re forgetting that for an Article III standing dismissal, the judge must accept all of the plaintiff’s allegations as true.
Therefore all of the judges and justices who have ruled on standing have stipulated that Obama is ineligible; was not born in Hawaii; surrendered his American citizenship when adopted by Lolo Soetoro and never reinstated it; is ineligible because his father was a Kenyan; and/or is ineligible due to his own birth outside the US, et cetera.
In spite of those stipulations, the judge has to determine whether the plaintiff suffered injury-in-fact; did the plaintiff state a claim upon which relief can be granted and does the court have jurisdiction over the matter at hand.
Standing determinations precede dismissals on evidentiary grounds.
Many of the eligibility lawsuits that were dismissed on standing grounds did not sue Obama directly so the 74 lawsuit number is the total number of rulings whether Obama was a defendant or not.