Mr Rogers spreads lies on this forum regarding Vattel and the Founders to further his political agenda..
“Related closely to the administration of justice, civil and criminal, the subject was, nevertheless, separate from “justice,” as the word was used in Vattel”
“Vattel lays it down as a maxim, that no sovereign can transfer any portion of public property, ... without the authority of the constitution”
“For the influence of Vattel’s ideas on the constitution”
“Singleton the judges referred to a fundamental idea which in its form of statement is probably traceable to Vattel {Law of Nature and Nations, Bk. I, ch. iii, § 34) “In short,” says Vattel, “it is from the constitution that these ..”
“The constitution of a state, Emmerich de Vattel wrote in 1758, is the fundamental settlement that determines”
“Vattel makes multiple mentions of the individual’s natural right to self-defense. In Section 3 he states, “In treating the right to security” The Second Amendment: the intent and its interpretation by the ... - Page 197
You are the liar in these debates Mr Rogers. You are not honest.
More proof Mr Rogers is not honest in these debates. He barked many times Vattel is limited to the Swiss. Mr Rogers must attack and discredit Vattel’s influence on the Founders to prop up his radical agenda.
“Professor Gilmore’s Notes on Vattel and the Constitution.”
“The expression “fixed constitution,” constantly used by James Otis and Samuel Adams, apparently derives from Emer de Vattel” The Constitution of Liberty: The Definitive Edition - Page 263
“This is the doctrine of Vattel. General Pinckney, in the South Carolina Convention, when this clause of the Constitution was under discussion, after quoting Vattel to this effect, goes on”
“Seventy years later, Vattel clearly distinguished between the constitution and the legislative power, which depended on the former and was inferior to it. Vattel wrote— as quoted by James Otis in 1764: “For the constitution of the state ..” Conceptual change and the Constitution/
“it is unquestionable that a Nation which finds its very constitution unsuited to it has the right to change it.”
“Vattel proposed that the nation, though a “whole people,” may act through “a majority of votes”
Federal union, modern world: the law of nations in an age of ... - Page 49
"That all children born within the dominion of the United States of foreign parents holding no diplomatic office became citizens at the time of their birth does not appear to have been contested or doubted until more than fifty years after the adoption of the Constitution, when the matter was elaborately argued in the Court of Chancery of New York and decided upon full consideration by Vice Chancellor Sandford in favor of their citizenship. Lynch v. Clark, (1844) 1 Sandf.Ch. 583...
...The real object of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, in qualifying the words, "All persons born in the United States" by the addition "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law), the two classes of cases -- children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State -- both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country."