As nice a piece of attempted obfuscation as I have seen in a while!
There are no sources that conflict with the Minor definition. As has been noted several times, when Gray gives the Minor definition of natural-born citizen, it is the last time he uses this term in the decision.
There is no "Minor definition" just "Minor doubt." And there are several sources quoted in WKA, which I have cited repeatedly, which conflict with Vattel's definition. See my post #373. Also note from Gray's quote two distinct groupings: natives or natural-born citizens as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. So, two sets of synonyms. Since he adjudged WKA not an alien/foreigner, it is quite obvious he is in the first set of synonyms: native/natural born. Or do you disagree that alien = foreigner?
Breaking up my answer into a few posts. As I mentioned to DL, I will be off line the next several days.
Right. A direct quote is "attempted obfuscation" followed by the classic strawmen you rely on so much.
•You say "so-called common law" - are you denying there is such a thing as common law? If you are, you have a lot of judges and legal scholars to argue with including Justices Scalia and Thomas.
I said "so-called" because of your claim about common law supposably defining "natural born." In law of nations, natural-born is based on natural, universal principles. In England, 'natural-born' is based on statutory, but arbitrary declarations, influenced by the whims of the crown. The latter is what was described in Calvin's Case where the King declared that children of Scots born in England were heretoforward natural-born subjects. The Scots were the ONLY aliens this originally applied to. The principles of citizenship in the U.S. are based on consent of the governed, not obligations demanded of a monarch.
•You appear to be conflating Vattel's Law of Nations with the common law. You have any back up for that legal theory?
Yes, the Minor case where Justice Waite used the term "at common law" to begin his definition of NBC, but the actual definition is, as we ALL know, a verbatim match of law of nations. I'll show this one more time and then we'll check to see if you're honest enough to admit that it matches.
"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
Waite used all three parts that are underlined above. He did not add any other criteria to define NBC, nor did he allow for alternate criteria.
•Minor did not define "natural born," he said there was doubt, and That the case would not resolve that doubt. You do understand what "doubt" means, don't you?
Sorry, but this is an outright falsehood. His criteria for NBC was "never doubted." The part for which there was doubt was about whether persons born without reference to parents were CITIZENS. It does not say there is doubt about them being natural born citizens. If they met the criteria for NBC, there was no doubt that these persons would be citizens. If they weren't NBCs, then there was doubt about their citizenship.
•WKA quoted many people on common law, including those who equated "natural born subject" and "natural born citizen". Ignore it as much as you like, you won't make it disappear.
Sorry, but this is not completely true. The closest anything comes to "equating" NBS and NBC in WKA is from a circuit court decision that referred to Shanks v. Rhodes, which said that persons born in the U.S. could be subjects of Great Britain via a Treaty. The Minor definition overrules this, which is why the Minor citation comes AFTER U.S. v Rhodes and gives the FINAL determination of what it means to be an NBC.
There is no "Minor definition" just "Minor doubt."
There is NO "Minor doubt." The Minor decision was UNANIMOUS. The NBC definition of NBC said it was NEVER doubted. WKA affirmed that Minor was declared a citizen by BOTH jus soli and jus sanguinis criteria. If the common law theory was the legal precedent, why would Justice Gray say ANYTHING about the citizenship of Minor's parents ... especially when Minor didn't specifically say Minor was born to citizen parents??? How much "doubt" was Gray showing about the Minor definition and decision? Answer: None.
And there are several sources quoted in WKA, which I have cited repeatedly, which conflict with Vattel's definition. See my post #373.
Post #373 was thoroughly debunked in post #375.
Also note from Gray's quote two distinct groupings: natives or natural-born citizens as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. So, two sets of synonyms. Since he adjudged WKA not an alien/foreigner, it is quite obvious he is in the first set of synonyms: native/natural born. Or do you disagree that alien = foreigner?
You're ignoring inconvenient facts. Natives are defined here as born to citizen parents. Was WKA born to citizen parents?? No. Is WKA a "native" in the "nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar"??? No. Absolutely not. Is it possible to be a citizen without being a "native or natural-born citizen"?? Yes. Is it possible to naturalize aliens at birth?? Yes. Did the 14th amendment citizenship clause apply to natives or those who were considered aliens?? According to this quote in WKA, it applied to aliens.
The questions we have to consider and decide in these cases, therefore, are to be treated as involving the rights of every citizen of the United States, equally with those of the strangers and aliens who now invoke the jurisdiction of this court.
By citing this quote, Gray is putting Wong Kim Ark in the category of strangers and aliens who invoked the jurisdiction of the court. Can an alien become a citizen at birth?? Certainly, but they are NOT natural-born citizens, which explains why WKA was never called a natural-born citizen NOR a native. Gray says in the facts as "agreed by the parties" that Wong Kim Ark "was permitted by the collector of customs to enter the United States upon the sole ground that he was a native-born citizen of the United States ..." but Gray doesn't specifically apply the term native-born citizen to WKA in the conclusion. It says WKA became a citizen at the time of his birth ... but not that he was born a citizen. Sorry, but there are plenty of distinctions here. Your attempt to make WKA an NBC by comparing synonyms fails.