Obama should have to stake his qualifications and defend them.
The SOS is not an advocate for the president or Democrat party or citizens of Hawaii.
He is an advocate for the rule of Georgia state Law, thus, the people of Georgia. He must have all birth records that exist in order to make an informed decision. If he doesn't get them, his decision is not an informed decision, and therefore Obama has not qualified until then.
Hiding records invalidates a candidate.
The SOS must make a guess to qualify Obama if he has no access to view all existing original documents.
If the Judge delivers the SOS a legal opinion that states NBC status is not definitive because defendant refuses to honor Georgia Sate law as to provide such known and qualifying documents, the SOS is a tight box. I'm certain that plaintiff will show that qualifying documents are being hidden. So the reasoning is is that they do not want the SOS to be forced to assume facts from hidden documents and or advocate for the defendant. The evidence either provided or denied by Defendant is entirely up to the defendant.
My only problem is that they’re asking the judge to set aside the law in terms of shifting the burden of proof. I’m not sure this makes a strong argument for that. If there’s any weakness in the argument, then there’s a potential problem in getting the desired outcome.