And it was a bullsh*t claim when Massachusetts did it too. It was a deliberate misrepresentation of what the framers of the Massachusetts constitution meant when they borrowed that "all men are created equal" line from the Declaration.
John Blair of Virginia studied law at London’s Middle Temple.
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, of South Carolina studied law London’s Middle Temple, attended Christ Church Christ Church College, Oxford, where he heard the lectures of the legal authority Sir William Blackstone and graduated in 1764.
John Rutledge of South Carolina studying law at London’s Middle Temple in 1760
William Houston of Georgia legal training at Inner Temple in London.
John Dickinson of Delaware In 1753, Dickinson went to England to continue his studies at London’s Middle Temple.
And they went through the process of creating American law (based on Vattel's ideas) while William Rawle did not. Notice the dates they graduated versus when William Rawle graduated? *HE* was not exposed to any of the cauldron of creation in regards to US Independence.
Yes, the Nation kept up the English law practices for everything that was not expressly rejected by American principles of government. Do you know the thing which was *MOST* rejected by the principles of American governance?
Being a "subject."
We rejected the idea of "subject", and we rejected the foundation on which "subject" was based.
Rawle argued that the 1790 Pennsylvania Constitution outlawed slavery.
He also argued that being born on the soil made someone a "citizen", and therefore all slaves born in America were free.
“He also argued that being born on the soil made someone a “citizen”, and therefore all slaves born in America were free.”
Do you have a link to his brief where he made that argument?