Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Marshall.
Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says
"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.
Aside from the English common law is not federal law argument, Blackstone says the same thing.
1 Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England; that is, within the ligeance, or, as it is generally called, the allegiance, of the king;
Chapter X , William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England
Natural born subjects are born on the soil of England AND within the Allegiance of the King
How can you be born 'within' an Allegiance?
Because your parents are already there.
:-)
----
I guess I just don't understand why people find this so difficult. The law of inheritance is what entitled Kings to their crowns, allows us to inherit property from our parents and gives us legal rights over our children.
WHY does everyone act like it's some big, convoluted mystery that you inherit your citizenship the same way, and that inherited citizenship is a naturally born one?
Ref post 70: the Venus case involved INTERNATIONAL LAW.
“The great question involved in this and many other of the prize cases which have been argued is whether the property of these claimants who were settled in Great Britain and engaged in the commerce of that country, shipped before they had a knowledge of the war but which was captured after the declaration of war by an American cruiser ought to be condemned as lawful prize. It is contended by the captors that as these claimants had gained a domicile in Great Britain, and continued to enjoy it up to the time when war was declared, and when these captures were made, they must be considered as British subjects, in reference to this property, and consequently that it may legally be seized as prize of war in like manner as if it had belonged to real British subjects. But if not so, it is then insisted that these claimants having, after their naturalization in the United States, returned to Great Britain, the country of their birth, and there resettled themselves, they became reintegrated British subjects and ought to be considered by this Court in the same light as if they had never emigrated.”
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/12/253/case.html
In reviewing different claims of citizenship placed by multiple countries, and which country should be given precedence during a time of war, Vattel was used - because Vattel was an authority on INTERNATIONAL LAW.
US law determines citizenship within the USA. International law resolved conflicting claims when two countries are in dispute. Could the owners of the Venus be considered subjects of Britain under international law?
The US Constitution extends to our borders. British law extends to the borders of the UK. US law cannot compel someone in Britain to be treated as a citizen of the US, and British law cannot compel someone in the US to be treated as British. That was, after all, part of the cause of the War of 1812, whose aftermath was being examined in the 1814 case of The Venus.