Nobody within the electoral system or any state court can compel the production of a candidate’s records. Hawaii can refuse to honor subpoenas from other states.
And the system won’t even demand records. We’ve gone through how many state ballot appeals and NOBODY would require legal documents to be provided.
And the HI state registrar has indirectly confirmed that they CAN’T provide any legally probative records, because what they’ve got is legally non-valid. The White House image was forged to hide that fact.
How would "an electoral system" subpoena records?
There are very specific rules which must be followed when subpoenaing records from another state. I'm not aware of any court case relating to Obama's eligibility in which a valid subpoena was issued to Hawaii and they refused to honor it, but I may have missed it. Which case are you referring to?
I'll bet that most of our presidents never even had birth certificates or any of the kind of records you're talking about. I just don't believe that our Founding Fathers thought that any candidate would be required to produce a birth certificate. And, what difference does it make? You know now that any document that Hawaii produces is just used by some as further evidence to convince themselves that Obama must have been born in Kenya.
If a court ever permitted a litigant to try to prove that Obama was born in Kenya, it would be a very short trial. I mentioned before that even Obama has no knowledge about his own birth other than what he has learned from others. However, notwithstanding that fact, the rules of evidence permit Obama to competently testify regarding the circumstances of his own birth "even though [he] had no way of acquiring personal knowledge about that fact." Federal Rules of Evidence, Section 804(b)(4)(A). So, Obama can take the stand and testify that he was born in Hawaii.
Who can and will testify that he was not born in the United States?