[CpnHook]

And you get over this notion that the consequences of Independence have anything to do with Blackstone or British law. The United States left those waters for new ones first voyaged by the Swiss.

Why should I get over it when there are published articles that adopt that view? Your problem is your "either/or" way of looking at this: that 'influence' can only be ascribed to one source.

Besides, I have to recognize that this comment is coming from the person who thinks a Justice writing a paragraph raising a question on domicile, who then quotes a writer giving a rule on domicile, who then summarizes that writer's view on domicile -- is actually trying to make a point about citizenship! That is failure at the fundamental reading comprehension level. I suspect your grasp of these other sources is no better.

[Fantasywriter]

Hook: ‘He claims that the jus soli rule of citizenship was not the original Constitutional view’

Sounds like he’s in good company. Now you’re claiming it wasn’t the original Constitutional view as well. Glad to see that you and DL agree!

[DiogenesLamp]

Why should I get over it when there are published articles that adopt that view?

There are no published accounts from any founders that support that view. All such public accounts were speculation from people WHO WERE NOT THERE.

Again, Look up the word "Provenance." You don't have any.