[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

was one time

What a whopper! Not only did the Founding Fathers make use of it heavily (it was one of the two books George Washington never bothered to return to the library!), it was cited directly by name or quoted by the Founding fathers throughout their work. I do not know if it was only referenced once specifically within the confines of a constitutional meaning, but your attempt to de-emphasize the text is extremely dishonest.

Further, they used the term NBC and the term NBS interchangeably,

Which you do not actually bother to prove (you don't provide a single quote or source for anything you've said), but which in itself is entirely irrelevant anyway, since, from my same quote, for emphasis, "The Judge James Duane in his ruling described the importance of the new republic abiding by the Law of Nations, and explained that the standard for the court would be Vattel. He ruled that the Statues passed under the color of English Common Law, must be interpreted from the standpoint of its consistency with the law of nations"

It's also a stupid argument in and of itself, since obviously Vattel distinguishes between one who is, by nature, "of a country," and those who are merely naturalized. That can only refer to a natural born citizen, and is probably the reason why I cannot find a single translation of Vattel's work from any year that does not contain the phrase "natural born citizen," as that is the clear meaning of the text, though sadly I cannot find a translation from prior to 1790.

[Mr Rogers]

“What a whopper!”

Nope. There is only one mention of Vattel being brought up during all the debates on the Constitution, and during the ratification debates.

“it was cited directly by name or quoted by the Founding fathers throughout their work”

Nope. They were familiar with it and referenced it on matters of international law, but they did not discuss Vattel during their debates on the Constitution, and there was NO debate or discussion on the NBC clause. None at all, so Vattel could not have been discussed during a nonexistent debate on citizenship.

“Further, they used the term NBC and the term NBS interchangeably, / Which you do not actually bother to prove (you don’t provide a single quote or source for anything you’ve said)”

See below:

In February, 1785, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING NICHOLAS ROUSSELET AND GEORGE SMITH.” in which it was declared that Nicholas Rousselet and George Smith “shall be deemed, adjudged, and taken to be citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, rights and privileges of natural born citizens.”

In July, 1785, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING MICHAEL WALSH.” in which it was declared that Michael Walsh “shall be deemed, adjudged, and taken to be a citizen of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, rights and privileges of a natural born citizen.”

In July, 1786, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING JONATHAN CURSON AND WILLIAM OLIVER” in which it was declared that Jonathan Curson and William Oliver “shall be deemed adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born citizens.”

In March, 1787, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING WILLIAM MARTIN AND OTHERS.” in which it was declared that William Martin and Others,”shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born subjects.”

In March, 1787, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING EDWARD WYER AND OTHERS THEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that William Martin and Others,”shall be deemed, adjudged and taken, to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born subjects.”

In October, 1787, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING BARTHOLOMY DE GREGOIRE, AND MARIA THERESA, HIS WIFE, AND THEIR CHILDREN.” in which it was declared that Bartholomy de Gregoire, and Maria Theresa, his wife, their children,”shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, rights and privileges of natural born citizens.”

In November, 1787, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING ALEXANDER MOORE, AND OTHERS, HEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that Alexander Moore and others,”shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free citizens of this Commonwealth, & entitled to all the privileges, liberties, and immunities of natural born subjects.”

In June, 1788, the Massachusetts legislature passed, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING WILLIAM MENZIES, AND OTHERS, THEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that William Menzies and others “shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free citizens of this Commonwealth, and intitled to all the liberties, privileges & immunities of natural born subjects.”

In November, 1788, the Massachusetts legislature passed, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING ELISHA BOURN, AND OTHERS, THEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that Elisha Bourn and others “shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, & entitled to all the liberties, privileges & immunities of natural born Citizens.”

In February, 1789, the Massachusetts legislature passed, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING JAMES HUYMAN, AND OTHERS, THEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that James Huyman and others “shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free Citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the Liberties, Privileges and Immunities of natural born subjects.”

In June, 1789, the Massachusetts legislature passed, “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING NATHANIEL SKINNER, AND OTHERS, THEREIN NAMED.” in which it was declared that Nathaniel Skinner and others “shall be deemed, adjudged and taken to be free citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born subjects.”

In March, 1790, the Massachusetts legislature passed “AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING JOHN JARVIS, AND OTHERS, THEREIN NAMED” in which it was declared that John Jarvis and others, “shall be deemed adjudged and taken to be free citizens of this Commonwealth, and entitled to all the liberties, privileges and immunities of natural born subjects.”

Also in March, 1791, the Massachusetts legislature passed“AN ACT FOR NATURALIZING JOHN WHITE & OTHERS” in which it was declared that John White and others, “shall be deemed adjudged and taken, to be free citizens of this Commonwealth, and intitled to all the liberties, privileges, and immunities of natural born subjects.”

For details, see:

http://www.greschak.com/articles/natactma/index.htm

Notice they sometimes used NBC, sometimes used NBS...it didn’t matter which. Thus NBC & NBS were used interchangeably - which can only happen if they were thought of as being equivalent terms.

“That can only refer to a natural born citizen, and is probably the reason why I cannot find a single translation of Vattel’s work from any year that does not contain the phrase “natural born citizen,” as that is the clear meaning of the text, though sadly I cannot find a translation from prior to 1790.”

I can. You can find them here:

http://www.greschak.com/essays/natborn/index.htm

It includes photos of Vattel in French and in all the translations. The author of the website is a birther, but an honest one:

“Here is an English edition that was printed in 1797, in London. The phrase natural-born citizens was used in place of the word indigenes. This was the first edition of The Law of Nations (of which I am aware) to use the phrase natural-born citizens”

Vattel NEVER used the French phase for NBC/NBS, and all of his translations prior to 1797 used “natives” or “indigenes”. Since the Founders did not, they could not have been following Vattel.

“”The Judge James Duane in his ruling described the importance of the new republic abiding by the Law of Nations, and explained that the standard for the court would be Vattel.”

Yes. The Law of Nations pertains to International Law, and Vattel was an authority on international law. The USA does take international law seriously, as any nation must. But that has NOTHING to do with the NBC controversy.