[AmericanVictory]

Wrong on all counts. Many of the founders, John Jay, for example, and Benjamin Franklin, were adept in French and knew perfectly well what Vattel meant by indigenes. Others, like Washington, who were less adept in French, looked to them. Your assertion at the end of your piece has no foundation in the actual facts of the debate, where Vattel, whose first English translation appeared in the 1750's, was discussed often and sometimes at length along with Locke and others. Again, your authority does not stack up well against the likes of John Marshall and Story, who directly disagreed with what you say in well-known opinions.

[Mr Rogers]

No, not wrong on any account. The phrase “natural born citizen” did not appear in translation until 1797, and it is a poor translation. A better translation would be ‘The natives, or indigenous people...’

As for the debate, there was none. There was no debate involving that section of the Constitution.

There is no denying that “natural born subject” was a legal term with a specific meaning, or that “natural born citizen” is an Americanized version of it.

Had the Founders wanted to follow Vattel, they would have written “born of citizens”. That they used a legal term indicates they MEANT a legal term...they were not stupid enough to insert a legal phrase without intending the meaning of it.