She covers the history okay, but misses important court precedents and other references (no mention of Vattel, for example, not that Vattel conrols, just that his writings are part of the historical review)
Frankly, the reason she doesn’t discuss Vattel is because Vattel is, ultimately, irrelevant to the discussion. I keep seeing people throw Vattel’s name around, but they miss the point that Vattel himself later said that the natural law definition of “natural born” can be, and is, overriden whenever a nation enacts some form of positive law (which would include, for purposes of this discussion, English common law) to that effect. Because the Framers intended the common law to be controlling for what an NBC is, Vattel’s “natural law” definition is nothing more than an historical curiosity.