I agree.<quoted text>
Re Vattel. It is true, they did read Vattel. HOWEVER, they read a lot of other books too. Vattel was an expert on International Law, elections and the eligibility of candidates are DOMESTIC Law. Vattel recommended several things that we did not follow, such as every country having its own state religion and forcing people to join it or force them to leave the country. So, duh, just the fact that they READ Vattel does not mean that they used Vattel in the definition of Natural Born Citizen.
Of course the founding fathers were familiar with Vattel who was a scholar on INTERNATIONAL LAW; however as to MUNICIPAL LAW or DOMESTIC LAW he was not the source of our statutes regarding citizenship which is in the providence of a nation's municipal law.Citizenship depends, however, entirely on municipal law and is not regulated by international law. Tomasicchio v. Acheson, 98 F. Supp. 166, 169 (DC 1951).
Moreover, the United States Supreme Court has held that our citizenship laws were inherited from English common law. "Our concept of citizenship was inherited from England and, accordingly, was based on the principle that rights conferred by naturalization were subject to the conditions reserved in the grant. See Calvin's Case, 7 Co. Rep. 1 a, 77 Eng. Rep. 377 (1608). Schneider v. Rusk, 377 US 163, 170 (1964).
We thus have an acknowledgment that our law in this area follows English concepts with an acceptance of the jus soli, that is, that the place of birth governs citizenship status except as modified by statute. Rogers v. Bellei, 401 US 815,828(1971)
Nowhere in over 200 years of court opinions have had any court suggested that our citizenship law was based on Vattel's concept of citizenship. In fact, there are many court cases that held that children born in the United States to parents other than citizen parents are natural born citizens. "Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States. Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F. 3d 1017, 1019 (6th Cir. 1999).
As for the drafting of the Constitution, Blackstone's influence is noted throughout the document, such as, Law of Nations clause in which it was noted: ""In the fourth volume of his Commentaries, Blackstone has a chapter on Offences against the Law of Nations. Guided by Blackstone, the Founding Generation viewed the law of nations as a system of rules deducible by natural reason, and established by universal consent among the civilized inhabitants of the world. Justice Story would later put it,every doctrine that may be fairly deduced by correct reasoning from the rights and duties of nations, and the nature of moral obligation, may be said to exist in the law of nations. 3 Dartmouth C. Undergraduate J.L. 51 (2005)
Another example of Blackstone' influence "The universal maxim of the common law of England, as Sir William Blackstone expresses it,`that no man is to be brought into jeopardy of his life more than once for the same offence,' is embraced in article V of amendments to the Constitution of the United States, and in the constitutions of several States, in the following language:`Nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;' and in many other States the same principle is incorporated in the organic law, Kepner v. United States, 195 US 100, 132 (1904)
As for Vattel's contribution to the Constitution, there has not been one decision in which a court has cited Vattel's influence on drafting of the CONSTITUTION. This is not to say that courts have not cited Vattel on the INTERNATIONAL LAW in which his book "Law of Nations" have been cited by the courts but as to the CONSTITUTION AND MUNICIPAL LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, Vattel's influence was nonexistent