Same way.
Somewhere there is out there floating around, an inside baseball story which had credibility with the Con Law bar that the language about "natural born" was incorporated for a reason not related to the argument in Minor.
Having researched the history of the Constitutional provision extensively, I will tell you that I think the argument is pretty clear that even as to original intent, the founder's were directly focused on the legal substance--they were primarily concerned only about place of birth and that because they were concerned about the prospect that someone who was under the jurisdiction of a foreign sovereign would become head of state of the US.
I don't even see a more Constitutionally committed Court kicking an elected President or Vice President out over the birthplace of his parents--if the issue were ever relevant, it would be because you could argue that they were the parents on vacation in the US; the kid was born in the US but because they were sojourners or other happenstance presence persons, the kid was subject to the jurisdiction of the sovereign of the place of the parents citizenship.
In the modern world, even that argument doesn't have much force either. I have had a case where US taxing authorities have sought to collect millions of dollars of tax from a German national because in 1946, his mother accompanied his father for a week at a post war business conference in New York when he was born and he was therefore a US Citizen who owed tax on his multi millions of world wide income over the intervening period.
In the case of Rubio, there isn't any argument that he was only the result of a temporary event in the US.
...the kid was born in the US but because they were sojourners or other happenstance presence persons, the kid was subject to the jurisdiction of the sovereign of the place of the parents citizenship.
Isn't that the very case with Sr. who was only here on a student visa?
And since his father was an "alien" (the legal definition) doesn't the citizenship follow the father?
I don't even see a more Constitutionally committed Court kicking an
elected President or Vice President out over the birthplace of his parents...
Could you see a more, or even a less, Constitutionally committed Court kicking an
elected President or Vice President out over the citizenship of his parents?