[STE=Q]

De Vattel was absolutely an INFLUENCE on the FRAMERS in terms of their VIEWS on SOVEREIGNTY, neutrality policy, treaties and domicile. But there has not been identified a single case where any American authority has deferred to de Vattel on any issue of CITIZENSHIP.

(Emphases mine) De Vattel INFLUENCED FRAMERS VIEWS on SOVEREIGNTY (as you state)

It would seem SOVEREIGNTY and CITIZENSHIP are intertwined.

A State could hardly divorce the question of who shall be, or NOT be, a citizen(or a Natural born Citizen)from considerations of SOVEREIGNTY, in relation to it's integrity -- as a STATE.

Therefore, it would seem reasonable (from your statement)that Vattel DID also influence the framers in regards to who is and who is NOT a citizen.

"I say,that in order be be of the country, it is NECESSARY that a person be born of a FATHER who is a CITIZEN, for if he is born there of a STRANGER, it will be ONLY the PLACE of his birth, and NOT HIS COUNTRY." (Vattel)

Haven't we been here before?

STE=Q

[EnderWiggins]

"Therefore, it would seem reasonable (from your statement)that Vattel DID also influence the framers in regards to who is and who is NOT a citizen."

And yet... we find in every case where de Vattel is referenced on issues of sovereignty (look at Syc's list... its got almost 75 examples), citizenship is never mentioned.

So... how intertwined are they? Apparently not so much.