Since you pinged me, I guess it is OK for me to answer:
I kinda wanted to wait until AFTER you weighed in with your “esteemed” opinion of this alleged legal source. Has it ever occurred to any of you legal giants to go to the same dictionary and look up the word “citizen” and perhaps the term “naturalized citizen.”
I don’t have access to your version, although I do recall owning a copy, somewhere. Here is the 1892 version. Both volumes are online. You may find “citizen” at page 316, of Volume One. There you will find that “native citizens” unlike “naturalized citizens”, may be presidents and vice presidents, making the term the same as “Natural Born Citizen.”
http://books.google.com/books?id=YCRAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Once again-—I leave you alone for a few hours, and come home to find you stuck, head first, in the toilet. You see the real problem here is, one doesn’t use LEGAL DICTIONARIES
to TRUMP CASE LAW. That is why most legal dictionaries will reference cases in the applicable definitions.
Plus, by showing the definition of the “LAW OF NATIONS” above to the whole wide world, you have just gutted your premise that those words refer to the book by Vattel. Clearly, BY YOUR OWN SOURCE, it refers to international law.
parsy, who is shaking his head in wonderment. . .
All the prattling about allegiance and loyalty has nothing to do with thoughts in the mind of a President, that's for the electorate to winnow out, since the Founders could not possibly know what some putative, future candidate might or might not believe.
What they did do, however, is preclude future legal claims upon that Executive by any other nation. The only way to do that is to have an Executive who is born both in the country, to avoid any foreign jus soli claims, and of citizen parents, in order to avoid any foreign jus sanguinis claims.
LOL. Swing and strike.