Look at it from another angle. Instead, look at the actions of the Founders and the action and laws enacted by the US government. The very 1st US Congress from 1789 to 1791 passed the 1790 Naturalization Act where the children of former alien fathers passed on their naturalized US citizenship onto their children upon the fathers who became US citizens. It did not matter if those children were born inside the United States since their fathers were still foreigners; the children did not become citizens until their father became US citizens. If for some reason a father of a child failed to become naturalized or was a unsuccessful applicant, the children of that child could apply for citizenship independently when he reached the age of 21. Jus Sanguinis was a dependent factor for children to become US citizens from their naturalized fathers. What was Obama's father - Kenyan right?
It was all the same under the tighter restrictions in the 1795 and the 1798 Naturalization Acts up until the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1 - “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;"
Nothing changed in the 14th Amendment except citizenship upon birth. It says citizens - not natural born citizen, and conveying natural born citizen because of the 14h Amendment is a complete fallacy. The Supreme Court 1898 decision of making Wong Kim Ark a citizen is a far cry from making him a natural born citizen. Who were the parents of Wong Ark? They were subjects to the Emperor of China. Even the celebrated by leftists everywhere in the highly flawed Indiana Appeals Court of Ankeny opinion admits that the Wong Kim Ark was not declared a natural born citizen. The accurate understanding of the 14th Amendment is that it conveyed naturalization at birth and not natural born citizenship.
Jus Sanguinis is just as important to becoming a natural born citizen as being born inside the United States since both of these factors have to be met. There is nothing from the liberal spin machine is going to change these facts in history.
the children of that child = the children of that father....
Or, you can use that initial law to show that the founding fathers did not adhere to Vattel’s definition, since they explicitly went around it (born outside the territories of the US). Add to that the Supreme Court decisions in the 1800s after the passage of the 14th Amendment where English common law (jus soli) is referenced, and we are left with a strong case that Vattel’s definition is questionable at best as what was intended by the founders.