Supporting your assertion is a Swiss writer who died before the Declaration of Independence was written. Supporting mine? The Father of our Constitution.
I’m pretty comfortable is saying that it’s not Madison who’s interpreting the document incorrectly.
So you believe that by NBC the Framers meant, ‘a child born to two foreign parents, dropped in the US on a short maternity stay & then taken back to be raised by its parents in its true home/place/foreign culture/foreign tradition. You honestly believe that is what the Framers meant?
If your answer is yes, then nothing anyone can say will ever penetrate the miasma. The idea that this is what the Framers had in mind is psychotic. No better word for it—full bore psychosis.
You left out a bunch of people. Aristotle, James Monroe, James Madison, Chief Justice Marshall, Justice Washington, Dr. David Ramsey, Chief Justice Waite, The entire Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 1808, With supporting commentary from George Washington, John Adams, Four Congressmen in the Debates on the 14th amendment, and a whole lot more people besides. I believe it's safe to say that you really have no idea how many people are supporting "my" assertion. It's more accurate to say that "I" am supporting Theirs.
Supporting mine? The Father of our Constitution.
No he isn't. He's pointing out that in absence of positive law, Common law is the default. He says so in his previous commentary.
It were to be wished, that we had some law adduced more precisely defining the qualities of a citizen or an alien; particular laws of this kind, have obtained in some of the states; if such a law existed in South-Carolina, it might have prevented this question from ever coming before us; but since this has not been the case, let us settle some general principles before we proceed to the presumptive proof arising from public measures under the law, which tend to give support to the inference drawn from such principles.
.
I’m pretty comfortable is saying that it’s not Madison who’s interpreting the document incorrectly.
You're pretty comfortable in saying it because you have been misinformed, and don't know what you are talking about. Madison is NOT interpreting the US Constitution. The constitution of that time said nothing regarding what constitutes a citizen. Madison even says that states can make their own laws to decide what the requirements for citizenship are. If you are going to argue with people who've researched this, you ought to get your facts straight before you pop off.
So answer me this smart guy, if being born here was the only requirement to be a citizen, why did they bother creating the 14th amendment?