Replies

That is a very good find, Doc. And I absolutely agree that it strengthens your claim that de Vattel might have influenced the Framers regarding their conception of citizenship. It clearly qualifies as a "tenuous connection between de Vattel and the phrase 'natural born citizen.'"

But is it close to being good enough?

First, Blackstone's construction of "natural born subjects" is rather closer to "natural born citizens" than is de Vattel's "natural subjects," especially as no translation is needed whatsoever.

But more to the point, Blackstone actually gives us a definition of "natural born subjects" while de Vattel offers no such definition for "natural subjects." Here is the rest of the sentence in which you found "sujets naturels."

"The natural subjects of a prince are bound to him without any other reserve than the observation of the fundamental laws; — it is their duty to remain faithful to him, as it is his, on the other hand, to take care to govern them well: both parties have but one common interest; the people and the prince together constitute but one complete whole, one and the same society."

Among the things that certainly is not is a definition of "natural born subjects/citizens." Contrast it with Blackstone's straightforward. "The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such."

After all, the "de Vattel definition" offered by Birthers is not a definition of "sujects naturels." It is a definition of "Les naturels ou indigenes."

But perhaps most importantly, your assertion that "Vattel's work was among the most influential work used while drafting the the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, whereas, Blackhole's work took the backseat," is patently absurd. There is not a legal expert on the planet who would claim that English common law "took a backseat" to de Vattel.

The Constitution actually cites common law. It never sites de Vattel.

49 out of the 50 states have formally adopted English common law via official reception statutes. None have done anything similar for de Vattel.

There are literally tens of thousands of Supreme Court citations to English Common law. There are are only a fraction as many citations to de Vattel. The disparity is even more stark when trying to find Supreme Court citations to de Vattel in cases dealing with citizenship.

And finally... the only Framer who commented on the basis for citizenship that we can find, James Madison, is clearly advocating a model that is in congruence with English common law and in contradiction to de Vattel.

Again though... I fully admit that you have done something no other Birther in this thread has been able to do... you have substantively moved your position forward with a piece of genuine evidence.

Kudos.

> The Constitution actually cites common law. It never sites de Vattel.

The Constitution does not “cite” Blackstone either!

Blackstone is NOT the end all and be all of common law. One of the first and — throughout England's history — one of the most significant treatises of the common law, Bracton’s De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae ("On the Laws and Customs of England"), which was heavily influenced by the division of the law in Justinian’s Institutes.

But the Declaration of Independence does recognize Natural Law. That would be Vattel, who heavily influenced French Ambassador Franklin. Franklin helped Jefferson by editing the drafts of the Declaration of Independence. Franklin was also the head delegate in the First "Committee of Eleven" that began drafting the Constitution in the summer of 1787.

Blackstone, in contrast, saw that Natural Law might be useful in determining the content of the common law and in deciding cases of equity, but was not itself identical with the laws of England.

Further, the Constitution does not cite the Ten Commandments or the Bible.

But as the majority of Framers feared their Christian God, there is no doubt that the influence of our Republic's laws from the Ten Commandments — and the Bible from which they came — is indelible on the Declaration of Independence that founded our nation:

Then in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

-snip-

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.