No. 09-5801 (2010 heard on Nov 10th)
Supreme Court of the United States
RUBEN FLORES-VILLAR, Petitioner
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent
(“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners, who are permitted to settle and stay in the country.”). In exchange for permission to “settle and stay,” aliens were “bound to the society by their residence . . . subject to the laws of the state[.]” Id. Such allegiances were required even though a permitted alien did “not participate in all the rights of citizens.” [footnote: For examples of eighteenth century analysis of Vattel, see generally ST. GEORGE TUCKER, A LETTER TO A MEMBER OF CONGRESS (1799)]
Forgot to say that RUBEN FLORES-VILLAR (Petitioner) lost, the United States (Respondent) using the citing of Vattel won the case whose opinion was just released this past June. so that kinda puts to rest that notion that the US Govt does not hold the works of Vattel as important to defining US citizenship.
No. 09-5801 (2010 heard on Nov 10th)
Supreme Court of the United States
RUBEN FLORES-VILLAR, Petitioner
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/09-10/09-5801_RespondentAmCuIRLI.pdf