IF the original long form certificate really is sealed; the question is why? Well, the Hawaiian statute (effective in 1972) for a Delayed Birth Registration for a Legal Change Status for persons 7 years of age and older could be obtained for a variety of reasons such as adoption, legitimation, or paternity. Anyway, the existing certificate and the evidence upon which the new certificate was based was sealed and placed in a special file. Delayed Birth Certificates are issued in lieu of a Hawaiian Birth Certificate. Delayed Birth Registrations were for persons that were supposedly born in Hawaii, but not previously registered in the State.
Just throwing out some ideas here. Delayed Birth Registration was for persons adopted or legitimized with a name that differed from the original, right? IF he were named Steve Dunham or Joe Blow, they would have needed a DBR when he became Obama or Soebarkah or Soetoro or Sutoro or Suharto or whatever variation in spelling. Another DBR would be needed when changing a named from Soebarkah/Soetoro back to Obama. There are so many scenarios it boggles the mind.
This has been one of my points for a very long time. The Fact that Hawaii will not certify his document as a "True and Correct copy of the ORIGINAL record" leaves too much wiggle room to cover up a lot of possible scenarios. It has always been my contention that Article II eligibility requirements ought to trump any and every state's laws regarding privacy or any other attempts at obscuring or obfuscating the truth.
At this point we have no way of knowing if he had undergone a name change, was adopted, born at home, born elsewhere, or any number of ways in which his credentials could and should be called into question. Till we get some proof that Hawaii's documents are Original and legit, as far as i'm concerned his Presidency is of dubious legitimacy.