Various documents I have read from the founding era indicate that the primary requirement to have a child declared as a natural born citizen was for the father to become a resident and show intent to become a citizen. This notion is reflected in the "naturalization act of 1790" and the Virginia declaration on who shall be deemed a citizen.
If Rubio's father had made his intention to become an American Citizen known prior to Rubio's birth, (and I am assured that he did) Then I am willing to argue that Rubio was born owing no allegiance to any other nation, and is therefore eligible. That the father may not have gone through the "process" by the time he was born is merely a "technicality" in my mind. If the first congress was willing to consider this "good enough", who am I to second guess their intent?
That ONLY applied if the father died before the child was born.
addition...and in any case, the child still became a citizen via naturalization and was never considered a natural born. Natural born = parents citizens prior to birth of the child, period.
I see Rubio’s situation the same way. But it is not up to me to decide whether Rubio is eligible. Every man is NOT a law unto himself. That is what we have courts for - to interpret the law so the nation knows what interpretation is legally binding. I think that’s all any of us are really asking for, and if that is too much for the courts to do then let’s just get rid of the courts because they’re worthless.