Is that the reason, or is that speculation?
Here again, the father's citizenship via jus sanguinis is passed onto their child.
I don't deny that, just like I don't deny US vs Ark was based on jus soli. But either is beside my point in that the act as passed by Congress was counter to Vattel, which required both jus sanguinis AND jus soli; Congress saw otherwise.
As a result, to claim that Vattel's position is what the founders meant is quite disingenuous simply by the actions of the founders in their first Congress. Vattel may have been a component, but it was by no means the exclusive guiding principle used at that time.
It's an obvious conclusion. Those words have never appeared in any passed legislation since 1790. You cannot modify the meaning and intent of the US Constitution without an Amendment - not legally. It is the very reason there is judicial review of laws passed by Congress. SCOTUS strikes down unconstitutional laws all the time.
I don't deny that, just like I don't deny US vs Ark was based on jus soli.
And it would be falsely to conclude that Wong Ark was a natural born citizen just only that of a citizen.
Congress saw otherwise.
Congress did not see otherwise.
As a result, to claim that Vattel's position is what the founders meant is quite disingenuous simply by the actions of the founders in their first Congress.
They took it out because as I say...they made a mistake.