That is the big question as what type of citizenship does birth under a protectorate status convey? What if his parents were born in Puerto Rico, also a protectorate?
According to this report by the Congressional Research Service, being born in a Protectorate satisfies the requirement to be born on US soil, so why would it not satisfy the same for his parents?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/74176180/Qualifications-for-President-and-the-%E2%80%9CNatural-Born%E2%80%9D-Citizenship-Eligibility-Requirement
Minor v. Happersett says that natural born citizens are “children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens”. It does not explicitly state that the parents had to have been its citizens at the time of the birth of the child, and therefore an argument can be made that a person born in the US to people who subsequently because US citizens became a natural born citizen when his parents became US citizens. I have not seen this analysis before, and perhaps it is flawed, but I believe it is not inconsistent with the language of the holding in Minor.
Rubio’s father did become a US citizen following Marco’s birth; to my knowledge Barack Hussein Obama I never did become a US citizen.
Perhaps you should consult with Arlen Specter, he was very persuasive inserting totally irrelevant Scottish Law B$ into the impeachment trial of the language expert.
To that pojnt you are correct, which brings us further down the next road ofverifying whether Cuba was a US Protectorate at the time of the Senator’s birth as it relates to his father and possibly mother (not assuming she had previously been naturalized) or had the legal sovernty of Cuba changed prior to that date.