The Founders read Vattel in the French original form and utilized his ideas and concepts extensively. They chose his interpretations over English common law in many instances.
The Founders quoted Vattel's treatise to each other and went back and rewrote the section on qualifications for the Presidency specifically to address the issue of Natural born citizen as defined by Vattel. The Founders and the early Congress specifically revised the Immigration act of 1790 in 1795 to codify that American law differed English common law and to protect from an American President who could be claimed as an English subject.
The Founders read Vattel in the French original form and utilized his ideas and concepts extensively. They chose his interpretations over English common law in many instances.
None of this, however, is to say that they specifically drew upon Vattel when they were crafting the NBC clause, or that they had him in mind with regard to its interpretation. Madison seems, in fact, to suggest the opposite, from congressional debate on May 22, 1789,
"It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other."
He previously states that this was a "general principle" which he was going to use in his argument regarding the eligibility of an elected member of Congress who was accused of not meeting residency requirements. Madison argued that he DID meet the requirement because he was essentially a natural born citizen of South Carolina, based upon the fact that he was born in that (at the time) colony - nothing at all was said about his parentage, and Madison even says that place, not parentage, was what applied in the USA.
The Founders quoted Vattel's treatise to each other and went back and rewrote the section on qualifications for the Presidency specifically to address the issue of Natural born citizen as defined by Vattel. The Founders and the early Congress specifically revised the Immigration act of 1790 in 1795 to codify that American law differed English common law and to protect from an American President who could be claimed as an English subject.
In the process of codifying that difference from then current English law, they were in fact returning back to an earlier and more enduring and settled common law definition of natural born citizen. The English laws in question were recent innovations, and it's doubtful that, based on the Founders' reverence for Blackstone as well, that these laws were even thought of as being part of "the common law."
At any rate, the changes wrought in 1795 were *not* in accord with Vattel. Indeed, they'd most likely represent a move further away from Vattel's definition.
The great irony in all of this is that if folks really want to rely this heavily on Vattel, then the situation for Cruz is even worse than merely from a jus soli standpoint, for Vattel defines an NBC (well, maybe, I think the translation from French on this point may be a little inaccurate and self-serving) as one "born in the country, of parents who are citizens." In other words, per Vattel, you're ONLY an NBC is you BOTH are born here AND have parents who are citizens - which could, depending on if one or both parents are required, doubly disqualify Cruz.
At any rate, the sum total of opinions given by the early jurists, etc. firmly demonstrates that jus soli is pretty much settled as "the" interpretation of NBC.