“I never said he was, but his work helped the founders define terms.”
The courts disagree.
“An anchor baby, a liar like 0b0z0, according to you is the same as a son of two Americans.”
I disagree with the anchor baby concept, but I’m not stupid enough to try to change it in the courts. However, if I did, I would NOT argue Vattel. I would point out that WKA says parents “in amity” can be foreign born, but parents in an invading army do not give birth to a citizen.
Then you disagree with yourself. You have to suspend common sense and plain English in favor of leftist legalese to make your argument. What happens when the courts make unconstitutional rulings?
You STILL did not address why the founders used different terms to define who qualifies for different offices....