[edge919]

The Supreme Court said the definition was extraconstitutional and cited a Vatellian definition, born in the country to citizens.

[conservativegramma]

Not only have there been numerous SCOTUS cases defining it using Vattel, it was defined as such in the Senate resolution regarding McCain, and it was defined as such by someone who should know - David Ramsey (a member of the same Continental Congress to whom we can credit the constitution) in 1789:

“[c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens….”....as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."

This isn't really rocket science. No offense, but I'm going to take the word of someone who was actually ALIVE when the Constitution was written and who knew personally those writing the Constitution to determine the correct definition. Anything less is nothing but hot air or a deliberate attempt to destroy our Republic.

[Non-Sequitur]

The Supreme Court said the definition was extraconstitutional and cited a Vatellian definition, born in the country to citizens.

In which case?