Conveniently, these so called experts lean on British Common law for their expertise and totally ignore Vattel’s Law of nations which is documented as having great importance to the Framers. The Declaration of independence uses Vattel’s wording so why is Vattel completely ignored in those who wish to shout BRITISH COMMON LAW. Do you think that the Framers, just finished with throwing out the KING and his SUBJECTS would start a new country mimicking British law? I do not! British “citizens”were SUBJECT TO THE KING. Vattel’s Law of Nations defines Natural Born Citizens as born of TWO parents BOTH Citizens of the country and Born on the soil of the country. America did not have far flung colonies throughout the world as the British EMPIRE did. The brand new United States of America had its own definition of natural born citizen as being one born with NO OTHER ALLEGIANCE.
True, but it is undeniable that the framers also relied extensively on British Common Law when draftting the Constitution.
They cherry picked the things they preferred and discarded that which they abhorred.
I do remember that 45 years ago when I was taking the oath as a Commissioned Officer of the U.S. Army I had to swear allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and to the Vattel’s Law of Nation because much later when the internet is invented, people will insist that those two documents are the same.
I also remember all of this nonsense on this forum back in 2008.
I do remember that 45 years ago when I was taking the oath as a Commissioned Officer of the U.S. Army I had to swear allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and to the Vattel’s Law of Nation because much later when the internet is invented, people will insist that those two documents are the same.
I also remember all of this nonsense on this forum back in 2008.