[PugetSoundSoldier]

Yet we come, once again, to the fact that the US has never defined such a "law of nature", in statute or legal opinion. But with Ark it did resort to jus soli, English common law (not Vattel).

[Lmo56]

Yet we come, once again, to the fact that the US has never defined such a "law of nature", in statute or legal opinion. But with Ark it did resort to jus soli, English common law (not Vattel).

AGAIN, you IGNORE the fact that Ark WAS NOT decided on jus soli, BUT SOLELY on the 14th Amendment.

However, jus soli is a component of the 14th Amendment, so I give you half-credit.

The Court DID NOT declare that birth jus soli makes one a "natural-born citizen", but it DID declare that birth jus soli makes one a "citizen".

To say ANYTHING ELSE about the Ark decision makes you a liar.

[patlin]

Yet, you come back with NADA except ARK. yawwwwwwn...... When discerning the original intent, one must go the the framers of the law according to ALL legal scholars that don't have an agenda to rewrite our history.

The founders didn't keep the feudal definition as everything about the feudal government was repugnant to them. Too bad your either too lazy or ignorant to actually study history. If a 1789 definition of a founding father, framer, signer of the constitution, a physician, a teacher, etc doesn't convince you of the fact you are wrong, then you are truly a DRONE and hopeless.