“There is NOTHING in the Ark decsion that says the phrasing of the 14th was meant to mirror the understanding of the NBC clause.”
Here is what it says:
“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.”
Let’s go thru that:
It says there is a principle “citizenship by birth within the country”. It says the exceptions to that rule are:
“the two classes of cases — children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State” and “children of members of the Indian tribes”.
It says their discussion has shown that those exceptions were driven “by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America” - referring to the common law NBS, and the US NBC.
It says the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is intended “to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words” those exceptions discussed, that were true in the colonies as NBS, and in the US prior to the 14th as NBC.
Thus you have A & B, where the set of all A is identical to the set of all B, thus A = B. Or in this case, A = B = C:
“citizenship by birth within the country”, excepting “children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State” and “children of members of the Indian tribes”, and that was true in the colonies under NBS, true after the Constitution under NBC, and true under the 14th by intent of the writers in saying “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,”.
Some here make a big deal about slaves not being citizens, but slaves were considered property under Dred Scott, and thus not capable of being citizens. And since so many people thought the Dred Scott case was an obscene rejection of “citizenship by birth within the country”, Congress and the states passed an amendment declaring, inescapably, what they believed had always been true under the NBC clause:
“citizenship by birth within the country”.
That is why birthers get their butts handed to them in court, even when the other side doesn’t show up. YOU HAVE NO CASE!
“Vattel proposed that the nation, though a “whole people,” may act through “a majority of votes”
You’re a fraud and a liar. You clearly barked 1000’s of times Vattel played no role forming the Constitution.
“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”...
Instead of relying on a misinterpretation, why not just go by what the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said the object of the 14th Amendment was when specifically discussing the insertion of the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" clause in the 14th Amendment during the Congressional debates?
That would be:
"The provision is, that ‘all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means." Congressional Globe
That's primary source FACT, right there. The Senate Judiciary Committee's website describes the crucial role the Committee played in the drafting of the 14th Amendment:
History of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
If anyone would know what was actually intended by the ratification of 14th Amendment, that would most definitely be Trumbull, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was specifically meant to EXCLUDE anyone owing allegiance to anybody else. Obama owed allegiance to a foreign sovereign at birth, a FACT already admitted to by the Democratic National Committee.