Here I'm not sure what ballpark you think you're playing in.
I've already shown you that the SCOTUS kicked Vattel to the curb on the question of birth citizenship. Are you trying to suggest Tucker took a Vattel-oriented view on that topic? He didn't.
In his "Blackstone's Commentaries," Tucker set forth this line from Blackstone:
The children of aliens, born here in England, are generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such." (And that is a summary of Lord Coke in Calvin's Case.)
Tucker then drops a footnote (footnote 10):
10. L. V. Edi. 1794, c. 110. L. U. S. 1 Cong. c. 3. 7 Cong. c. 28. accordant. Link
The references are to three items of U.S law: 1) Laws of Virginia of 1794 (the citizenship law for the Commonwealth originally drafted by Jefferson); 2) The Naturalization Act of 1790; and 3) the 1802 Naturalization Act.
Of these Tucker states U.S. law is "accordant" -- meaning in agreement with Blackstone. So Tucker is indicating that American law is in agreement with the jus soli view of Blackstone.