Replies

I am saying..the Law of Nations...referred to in the Constitution and the Federalist you cited is Vattels Law of Nations.

When the Founders, Judges..refer to the law of nations..or Law of Nations you can bet it is Vattel.

One more item..the Law of Nations prevails. It is law of the land.

I am saying..the Law of Nations...referred to in the Constitution and the Federalist you cited is Vattels Law of Nations.

When the Founders, Judges..refer to the law of nations..or Law of Nations you can bet it is Vattel.

One more item..the Law of Nations prevails. It is law of the land.

Unfortunately for your point of view, there is no American case law based on Vattel’s Law of Nations. If the book written by Emer deVattel was the law of the land in the US there would be a body of case law based on it.
There isn’t.
It would have been great for the purposes of legal clarification if someone with legal standing to sue could have tested these issues in a court of law but neither John McCain, Sarah Palin or the Republican National Committee chose to file suit against Obama for being illegally elected.
I’m betting that the Supreme Court would have entertained an appeal on Obama’s eligibility if McCain-Palin and the Republican National Committee were the plaintiffs and if major originalist constitutional attorneys had filed the briefs, people like Ted Olsen or Judge Robert Bork.

the Law of Nations...referred to in the Constitution and the Federalist you cited is Vattels Law of Nations.

Except that the full context makes it clear it is not. Reread the quote above (29) or follow the link: James Madison, father of the Constitution, makes it clear in the quote that it refers to relations with foreign powers.

Futher, toward the end of my quote, he does not capitalize "law of nations." The phrase "law of nations" dates back at least to ancient Roman times. The phrase was not unique to De Vattel, in the same way the title "Tort Law" might be used by several authors.