He's partly right. No quote from Vattel was submitted in any discussion on natural-born citizenship.
Was it on any other topic? There were several committees that were tasked with different issues, the Details committee for instance.
Why is it that Franklin had a copy and made sure that another made it to the University of Virgina (Forgive me here, I am going from memory, I believe it was the university of Virgina) if it was not relevant to what they were trying to accomplish?
Alexander Hamilton was greatly influenced by Vattel, and he wasn’t the only one. http://east_west_dialogue.tripod.com/vattel/id5.html
Here is a snippet from that site:
“The concept of judicial review, which Hamilton had championed in Rutgers v. Waddington, was included in the U.S. Constitution. In {The Federalist Papers,} No. 78, ``The Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,’’ circulated as part of the debate over the new Constitution, Hamilton developed a conception of constitutional law which was coherent with Vattel’s conception. Hamilton stated that it is a ``fundamental principle of republican government, which admits the right of the people to alter or abolish the established Constitution, whenever they find it inconsistent with their happiness.’’ However, the Constitution can only be changed by the nation as a whole, and not by the temporary passions of the majority or by the legislature. Both to protect the Constitution, but also to ensure just enforcement of the law, the independence of the judiciary from the legislature and the executive branch is essential. The judiciary must be the guardians of the Constitution, to ensure that all legislative decisions are coherent with it. This idea championed by Hamilton, that the courts ensured that the Executive and Legislative branches followed the Constitution, was later established as a principle of American jurisprudence by Chief Justice John Marshall. “
Partly right?
If he is 'partly right' then you imply that he is also, partly wrong.
Would you be so kind as to explain where you find the 'Wig' is wrong?
Or perhaps you mean that his statement(s)are incomplete in some way?
Could you elucidate further what you meant by "He's partly right" in regards to the wiggler's assertions.
Thanks!
STE=Q