Replies

Well there is that pesky section 1 of Article IV of the Constitution.
“Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”

Any public record can be challenged. Self-authentification means that the issuing authority does not have to prove that an official record is authentic. The burden of proof is on the challenger to an official document’s authenticity.

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.

The public acts part is the legislative. The records and judicial proceedings are for the courts.

From the first legal treatise after Ratification:

2. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And congress may by general laws, prescribe the manner in which the same shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
The act of 1 Cong. 2 Sess. c. 11, accordingly declares, that the acts of the legislature of the several states shall be authenticated by having the seal of their respective states affixed thereto; that the records and judicial proceedings of the courts of any state, shall be proved or admitted in any other court within the United States, by attestation of the clerk, and the seal of the court annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate of the judge, chief justice, or presiding magistrate, as the case may be, that such attestation is in due form. And records and judicial proceedings so authenticated, shall have such faith in every court within the United States, as they have by law or usage in the courts of the state, from whence they may be taken.
George Tucker, View of the Constitution of the United States / Note D, Miscellaneous Provisions

This 'record' was never signed off by a judge from another State, nor was it entered as evidence in a court of law.

It was a news release, and therefore wouldn't come under the full faith and credit provision.

Well there is that pesky section 1 of Article IV of the Constitution. “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”

There is no problem with full faith and credit, the problem is that the State of Hawaii is failing to cooperate in providing the CORRECT proof, and attesting to it's legitimacy.

The documents they have so far provided DO NOT CONSTITUTE necessary proof of birth in the United States. They would from most any other state, but not from Back Door American citizenship mill Hawaii.

Any state which allows someone to be born elsewhere yet still receive a birth certificate, and gives the parents up to a year to show a child to the appropriate authorities, cannot be regarded as an acceptable source of proof for birth on American soil.

Their attestation "or abstract of the record on file" completely destroys any evidentiary value for the document.

There is no ability to challenge when they have sole possession of the records and refuse to allow anyone to see the original.

If any of those gutless wonders of our legal system had any brains, they would have demanded Hawaii send a copy of the original, and require them to attest that it *IS* the original, and that no other such documents exist in their records.