That’s an interesting point.
Law of Nations is twice mentioned in the U.S.Constitution, English Common Law never. Also, and I was surprised to discover this, ‘democracy’ is never mentioned either.
This decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals is terrible, and as Leo Donofrio points out on his website, full of glaring discrepancies, omissions, and outright falsehoods.
He, for one, hopes publicity shines fully on Indiana’s Appeal Court decision because it is awful and amateursih vis a vis the Constitution.
A quick command + F of the Constitution only found “law of nations” once, and I’m somewhat skeptical that it is reference to the book. Certain words never being mentioned doesn’t mean the things they represent aren’t an influence on the document.
So far as we know the clause passed without any discussion and it isn’t explained in the Federalist Papers. I have been told that the Framers were all very familiar with Vattel. They may have been, but certainly not everyone in the US would have been. And I think they would have been more explicit if they were going to reject the definition everyone would be familiar with.
And, again, strictly from a pragmatic view considering the potential repercussions of agreeing with Vattel, I don’t think the court will. They have enough leeway here that siding with the common law definitions isn’t a huge stretch.
Yes, to mean what we call today "international law." It's not a citation or endorsement of Vattel's book.
English Common Law never
Try reading the Seventh Amendment, which mentions it twice.