The "defendants" (Gates, Obama) in the TRO application haven't offered any evidence to the court. The bench ruled on the strength (or in this case, the weakness) of plaintiff's argument alone.
Electronic copies of purported birth certificates floating around the internet ether aren't "evidence" of anything. Rules for weighing fact or evidence can only be applied to facts that are actually in evidence.
Well, of course.
And, of course again, the TRO was denied for obvious reasons.
What I’m referring to is down the road at trial, if the case ever gets to trial, when Obama submits his computer generated certification of live birth, when there is more compelling evidence (ie a birth certificate stashed away in Hawaii) that he could produce, to support his claim of being a natural born citizen, but refuses to produce it-—then his evidence should be viewed with distruct—
according to the jury instructions.