The good Hawaii doctor has no training in Constitutional Law, and is therefore completely unqualified to render such a judgment.
You're making an assumption that the State of Hawaii would make an official pronouncement like that, affecting the nation -- without running it through qualified lawyers that the State of Hawaii has to look at those very issues... :-)
I'm not making that assumption...
Two outcomes from a possible quo warranto:
1. He is found not to have been born in HI, then case closed easily. He is ineligble and removed from office.
2. If found to have been born in HI, then legal question is much more complex. The DC District Court would have to opine on the definition of a natural born citizen.
The #1 point wouldn't be the case, since the State of Hawaii has already said he was born there. That presumes (and it's a good presumption, I think) that the records indicate that and that the State of Hawaii is not going to lie about where he was born.
The #2 point is the only one that is relevant, as far as I can see now and the only place it's going to be decided, once and for all and finally -- is with the Supreme Court.
When we get a Supreme Court decision on the matter, then we'll know it's "settled law" and there's not more discussion on the matter.
I need to thank you for starting all your posts with “YOU WERE SAYING” followed by the quote in blue type. This way, I can skip your inane posts. Really helpful, especially on long threads.
By law, including federal law as they interpret it, the Offial of the State of Hawaii is not supposed to be revealing anything from the Birth Certificate. At least not without the permission of the principal, in this case The One. But she did. So I would not put much faith in the lawyers of the Hawaiian Health Department.