You only have half the equation. You must weigh the value of rationalizing why a technically eligibile candidate who will not repair more egregious damage to the constitution would be a better choice than one with an eligibility technicality but who will most definitely address far worse problems.
It is axiomatic that in our current situation we are going to get damage to constitutional principles. The question is do we accept the relatively minor damage, or do we accept the more serious damage caused by putting a more Liberal candidate into the position of nominating our federal judges. (Look up Trump's sister who is a federal judge to see what sort Trump would appoint.)
We can be prim and proper on the lesser questions while losing the bigger questions, but this would be a Pyrrhic victory.
I would also point out that "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
At this point in our history, Insisting that we toss away the best candidate to adhere to a foolish consistency which has already been broken, is tantamount to tossing the baby out with the bathwater.
In honor of Churchill’s memory, I raise my coffee to you in salute.