The law of nations wasn't just Vattel. Have you even done any reading of the law of nations? There were 7 or 8 prominent writers on the Law of Nations. Vattel was only one; albeit a prominent one. But his views on citizenship WERE NOT SHARED BY EVEN ONE OF THE OTHER 7 OR 8 MAJOR WRITERS ON THE LAW OF NATIONS.
So there absolutely IS NO "LAW OF NATIONS 'DEFINITION'" of natural born citizenship, or of citizenship in general, for that matter. Because the major writers on the law of nations held a BUNCH of different and conflicting views on citizenship.
No, actually it's not. The Wong court cited English common law over dozens of pages after affirming the 14th amendment does NOT define natural-born citizenship and AFTER it affirmed the Law of Nations definition from Minor.
The Wong Court cited the common law, which include English AND AMERICAN common law.
And Lynch (1844) clearly stated that THE AMERICAN COMMON LAW made people natural born citizens WITHOUT RESPECT TO THE CITIZENSHIP OF THEIR PARENTS.
Upholding the Constitution has nothing to do with scratching and clawing at it.
Insisting that it says things that it VERY CLEARLY never said - such as that it takes two citizen parents to make a natural born citizen - is twisting it, scratching at it, and clawing at it.
It’s a shame how dumb the framers of the Constitution were, spending all those extra words writing the qualifications for president without regard to what they had already written as requirement for Legislators, isn’t it? I wonder what soem of those men who authored parts of the Constitution have said reagrding NBC (’of that there has never been any doubt’)?
Is there some part of the word "verbatim" you don't understand??
Minor: all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens ...The Wong Court cited the common law, which include English AND AMERICAN common law.
Law of Nations by Vattel: The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
... to define citizenship by birth via the 14th amendment. To define NBC, they cited and affirmed the Minor definition, which I've already shown is a verbatim match of Law of Nations.
And Lynch (1844) clearly stated that THE AMERICAN COMMON LAW made people natural born citizens WITHOUT RESPECT TO THE CITIZENSHIP OF THEIR PARENTS.
The Lynch decision was a state court ruling by one judge giving an unsupported personal opinion. There's a reason why Lynch's claim about NBC is NOT cited in Wong Kim Ark while the Minor definition of NBC is fully cited.
Insisting that it says things that it VERY CLEARLY never said - such as that it takes two citizen parents to make a natural born citizen - is twisting it, scratching at it, and clawing at it.
This is drama-queen nonsense. Twenty-seven Supreme Court justices affirmed the definition I gave. There is no twisting, scratching or clawing.