Replies

I know the Framers read Vattel's book, and I'm sure consulted it for guidance in some areas. A new country (I note that Franklin calls it a state) would have to think about its relations with other nations. I was specifically asking if you thought the 10th Amendment was there because of Vattel's advice.

Yes. The Right of Inheretence concerning the 'excepting if the mother or father were aliens' part of the in the English law posted earlier in the discussion.

The phrase was "notwithstanding their Father or Mother were Aliens." "Notwithstanding" means "in spite of the fact that," not "excepting if." The law (apparently) was to remedy a situation that prevented natural-born subjects from inheriting through non-natural-born parents. It seems a stretch to use that situation to say that American citizens should only be able to inherit their presidential ability through citizen parents--especially when that was regarded as a situation to be remedied.

In free states, therefore, such as ours, the law of nations is the law of the people.

You're not really contending that Wilson is referring to Vattel's book in that quote, rather than to the generic term, are you?

Well, except my part of the family is just a decade short of being here for 400 years, and I pretty certain I've got a grip on the citizenship shell game.

And if one of your daughters were to marry a foreigner who declined to become an American citizen? (It happens.) I understand that you think their children would not be eligible for the presidency, but are you really happy with the idea that they wouldn't be American citizens at all?

I was specifically asking if you thought the 10th Amendment was there because of Vattel's advice.

I believe they followed Vattel a great deal, and have provided evidence that they did.

As far as having certain knowledge if the entire concept of the 10th Amendment revolved ONLY around Vattel without also relying on their own common sense, I can't say, as I am a researcher, not a psychic.

I would like to bring up however, Vattels words:

that several sovereign, and independent states may unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy, without each in particular ceasing to be a perfect state.

Does that NOT sound an awful lot like 'freedom of association' to you?

-------

It seems a stretch to use that situation to say that American citizens should only be able to inherit their presidential ability through citizen parents--especially when that was regarded as a situation to be remedied.

Evidence has been provided that that was exactly what happened. You have totally lost me on the 'situation to be remedied' part.

Have you any evidence from that time period to counter it?

-----

You're not really contending that Wilson is referring to Vattel's book in that quote, rather than to the generic term, are you?

A quote from James Kent earlier said Vattel was the most quoted jurist in the last half century, so do you have any evidence it is not?

-----

I understand that you think their children would not be eligible for the presidency, but are you really happy with the idea that they wouldn't be American citizens at all?

My happiness will not always revolve around my children's choices, so my philosophy has always been to be happy for THEM...not for what they do or don't do.

Which is very sweet of you to ask, but my personal feelings would in no way, shape, or form, give me any desire to change what has to be the most brilliant document in recent history.

The phrase was "notwithstanding their Father or Mother were Aliens." "Notwithstanding" means "in spite of the fact that," not "excepting if."

We may have been operating on an erroneous assumption here.

I decided to go straight to Blackstone himself.

The first and most obvious division of the people is into aliens and natural-born subjects.1 Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England; that is, within the ligeance, or, as it is generally called, the allegiance, of the king; and aliens, such as are born out of it. Allegiance is the tie, or ligamen, which binds the subject to the king, in return for that protection which the king affords the subject.

He narrows it down to 3 types;

These are the principal distinctions between aliens, denizens, and natives: distinctions, which it hath been frequently endeavoured since the commencement of this century to lay almost totally aside, by one general naturalization-act for all foreign protestants.
Blackstone's Commentaries, Chapter X

----

The words 'notwithstanding' and 'to inherit' both only appear once, and both in footnotes.

I don't know where the Ark court got it, but I don't think it was from Blackstone.