[DiogenesLamp]

Yes, I do. But the LANGUAGE of the law, used by men in 1787, was based on English common law. I have NOT said we are UNDER English common law, but that the term NBC finds its meaning in the English common law term ‘natural born subject’ - which was the normal legal term used then.

Yes, we use the terms "Captain" and "Corporal" but that doesn't mean our soldiers owe allegiance to the King as do theirs.

Our founding principles exclude the English understanding of subjectship. The very existence of our nation is a rejection of the character of being a subject. That some states continued usage of the term is nothing but verbal inertia. I note you have no references after 1789.

Even Thomas Jefferson initially wrote the word "subject" into the Declaration of Independence. He then rubbed it out and re-wrote the word "citizen." A more fitting symbol of what we did as a nation is unlikely to be found. We explicitly REJECTED Monarchical based subjectship law.

[Mr Rogers]

“We explicitly REJECTED Monarchical based subjectship law. “

Odd, then, that the same men and states seemed to have used the term interchangeably...

Perhaps you would like to tell me the basis of a commonly understood meaning of the legal term “natural born citizen” prior to 1787. Remember, it did not appear in any translation of Vattel prior to 1797. Indeed, someone following Vattel would have used the term native, or indigene - as Vattel did.