Since you place such a premium on the validity of court decisions, you’ll no doubt be pleased & eager to weigh in on a closely related question.
Namely, the courts have overwhelmingly found that the Constitution is more concerned with redefining ‘marriage,’ so as to establish and protect the right of two homosexuals to legally marry in a manner identical to that of a man & a woman, than it is with respecting States’ Rights. Do you agree that the vast majority of decisions on this subject have been correct? If so, why?
I disagree with those rulings but whether I personally agree or disagree is irrelevant. Those decisions stand until they are overturned by higher courts. Court decisions on homosexual marriage can also be rendered moot by legislative action that is subsequently upheld as constitutional.
It is the Obama ineligibility movement that has placed a premium on court decisions. The movement has almost exclusively relied on the civil courts as the preferred means of petitioning the government for redress of grievances. At last count, 340 civil judicial actions and appeals have been filed.
If those who believe Obama is ineligible had pursued criminal actions or legislative remedies, I would be discussing those results. But its been lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit.