What you left out is that the founders translated "naturel" to "natural born" and "natural" in the Journals of the Continental Congress prior to the adoption of the Constitution. Considering the rest of the passage from Vattel is about natural, native or indigenous citizenship, it STILL REQUIRES citizen parents. Also considering the founders wanted to limit foreign influence, this definition of natural-born citizen is in concert with the "nomenclature" as the Supreme Court explained was used by the founders to define the term found in Art II, Sec I.
“What you left out is that the founders translated “naturel” to “natural born” and “natural” in the Journals of the Continental Congress prior to the adoption of the Constitution.”
Not true. The passage you refer to has “sujets naturel” - which is translated natural born subject for the British, and natural born citizen for America. Naturel by itself is NOT translated NBC, but native or natural.
Further, the bad translation of Vattel has “indigenes” translated NBC, when it OBVIOUSLY is the same as “indigenous”.
And, beyond any doubt, they did NOT adopt Vattel’s idea that citizenship is controlled by the parents, and not by birth place. This is not Switzerland.
What Mr Rogers appears to be unaware of is that all of the founders that participated in the development of the constitution mostly studied in French, not english, because it was the accepted language of the intellectuals at the time. If one wanted to be current in world affairs, one read French.