Since when did the mixing of apples and oranges become a problem in American jurisprudence?
Marbury v. Madison was about a judicial commission to the federal bench. It ended up changing the trajectory, the very relevance of the Court itself.
One might logically think an original government birth document is best, but the court has decided otherwise. The fact that the case that established that precedent isn't similar to the case before the court, isn't necessarily relative to the court.
The precedent of judicial review established in Marbury has been cited in an innumerable number of cases that have nothing to do with judicial appointments or commissions.
The Certification can't possibly relate to any information not on it, but on the original. Such as place of birth of father. Attendant/Witness to the birth, etc.
The rules of evidence don’t apply in Family Law Court-—but they DO still apply in civil cases, like the one here.
Imagine how much fun you would have as plaintiff’s counsel when Obama tries to introduce his computer generated certification. Best evidence rule. LOL.
Like I said, apples and oranges.