Domestic decisions regarding a nation's own citizenship is not decided by international law, but it is clear you would prefer to have the United States subservient to the crackpots in The Hague.That's a strawman argument.
That is the truth. You just don't like it.
Citizenship of people born within the territory and jurisdiction of the United States is controlled by the 14th Amendment. Citizenship of people born outside the territory or jurisdiction of the United States is controlled by Federal law in effect at the time of birth.
No foreign law is relevant.
If we were referring to the Magna Carta as an early source of the rights we inherited from the English, you would be suggesting I want us to be ruled by England. Same sort of nonsense.
The Federal government uses the English common law system of law. Fact. Every state but one also uses the English common law system of law. Louisiana is the only state to use the French system, established there while it was a French colony before it was purchased from the French.
Nice try at making believe I was referring to the Magna Carta. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
That is your deliberately distorted view of what you want to project onto me.
The *natural law principles* that are outlined in the book are what our concept of citizenship is based on. That the book has been adopted as an authority on international law does not detract from the fact it puts forth a set of principles that follow natural law.
The Federal government uses the English common law system of law.
Except where it doesn't.
Previously, I had asked you to locate a letter written by James Madison in which he points out that the "common law" has been modified greatly by the states. I believe he also says words to the effect "had we undertaken the effort to make a distinction we would have written a "digest of laws" rather than a constitution!"
I used to have a link to it, but i've lost it. I know you can find it, and when you do, I want you to read the message James Madison is trying to impart, and take it to heart, because it clarifies where we deviated from "common law."
I believe he also mentions something about the Common Law requiring people to support the Church of England.
Nice try at making believe I was referring to the Magna Carta.
Do analogies go over your head? I never said you were referring to the Magna Carta. I simply pointed out what you were doing was *LIKE* saying we should be ruled by England if I cite the Magna Carta.
Notice I still say "Like" doesn't mean "is." Though some on your side seems to think it does.