“Let’s ignore that the definition of natural born citizen proposed in Minor v. Happersett and cited by Wong Kim Ark appeared in a passage on ‘natives and citizens’ of whom Vattel described citizenship as ‘naturally’ following at birth the condition of the father.”
Ummm...Minor v. Happersett wrote:
“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”
To repeat: “Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
They then allow that there is a DISPUTE over the status of children born of alien parents, which the Court in that case did not attempt to decide. However, they referenced COMMON LAW for guidance, not Vattel!
It is dishonest to claim they proposed a definition of NBC IAW Vattel. And yes, they DID “...equate natural citizenship at birth with the contemporaneously used term natural born citizen” - only not always in the way you desire.
But there is another authority which among all professing to be Democrats will, I presume, be regarded as of the most important character. I allude to the Virginia legislature. That venerable body has received at the hands of the Democracy, a sort of political apotheosis. Its patriotism and wisdom and profound knowledge of the Constitution are the constant themes of praise.
Virginia citizenship Law:
Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that all white persons born within the territory of this commonwealth and all who have resided therein two years next before the passing of this act, and all who shall hereafter migrate into the same; and shall before any court of record give satisfactory proof by their own oath or affirmation, that they intend to reside therein, and moreover shall give assurance of fidelity to the commonwealth; and all infants wheresoever born, whose father, if living, or otherwise, whose mother was, a citizen at the time of their birth, or who migrate hither, their father, if living, or otherwise their mother becoming a citizen, or who migrate hither without father or mother, shall be deemed citizens of this commonwealth, until they relinquish that character in manner as herein after expressed: And all others not being citizens of any the United States of America, shall be deemed aliens.
Minor: "... all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners."
Vattel: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens."
About whether they are citizens. Not whether they are natural born citizens.
it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents
“Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
They may be born citizens, they need not be natural born citizens. They can even be both born citizens and naturalized. (born abroad of one citizen parent, or even of two. Not born in the US, as under the 14th amendment, but still born a citizen, under the statute law, and thus naturalized.
It's not ONE type of born citizen ONE type of naturalized citizens. It's just that there is not other way other than birth of naturalization to become a citizen. (And you can do both, as anyone born abroad of one citizen and one alien parent did) There are several types of each, and they are treated differently under the Constitution. For all purposes other than retention of citizenship and eligibility for President, they all have the same rights and responsibilities. (But try being a newly naturalized citizen from Red China and getting a TS/SCI clearance. It's harder than if all your great-grandparents were citizens (my Dad's maternal grandparents were not at least not by birth, but all my grandparents were, AFAIK, there being some big holes in our knowledge of both grandfathers birth, it's fairly possible that my paternal grandfather, who was adopted from the orphan train, may not have been either), and even you get the clearance, you may not be allowed into some compartments)