“The translation is not “bad” (well, maybe for Obama apologists). The translation was changed to fit the prevailing understanding of the term. Second, it’s not a screw-up in any sense. The definition and decision was unanimous. The Wong Kim Ark court cited that definition and posed NO PROBLEMS with the definition, and gave the holding based on Virginia Minor being born to citizen parents.”
You are factually incorrect. The translation WAS bad, since the term NBS (sujets naturel in French) was not in that passage, although Vattel used it once elsewhere, so he knew about it. That means he CHOSE not to use it.
And WKA only cited Minor to show that the Slaughterhouse decision was wrong, and the WKA decision did not, in any way, endorse the passing comment found in Minor.
Here it is:
“That neither Mr. Justice Miller nor any of the justices who took part in the decision of The Slaughterhouse Cases understood the court to be committed to the view that all children born in the United States of citizens or subjects of foreign States were excluded from the operation of the first sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment is manifest from a unanimous judgment of the Court, delivered but two years later, while all those judges but Chief Justice Chase were still on the bench, in which Chief Justice Waite said: “Allegiance and protection are, in this connection” (that is, in relation to citizenship),
reciprocal obligations. The one is a compensation for the other: allegiance for protection, and protection for allegiance. . . . At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of [p680] parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.
Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.”
That is NOT, in any way, an endorsement that two citizen parents are needed to be a natural born citizen, particularly since the spent half the decision showing it was NOT.
Sorry, edge. You are a nut.
Vattel used the term "naturel" which the framers translated as "natural-born" in 1781. The translation of Vattel was changed to fit this to the contemporary and prevailing understanding. Why else was it changed?? Why would it be changed to a "bad" translation instead of FIXED from a bad translation?? Like always, you aren't making any sense.
And WKA only cited Minor to show that the Slaughterhouse decision was wrong, and the WKA decision did not, in any way, endorse the passing comment found in Minor.
The Minor citation doesn't show that Slaughterhouse is wrong. It only shows that it wasn't comprehensive. Slaughterhouse considered exclusions via the subject clause. The Minor exclusion is NOT based on the subject clause. A person born to citizen parents would also be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, but that's not what the Minor definition of NBC is about. It's an exclusion to the ENTIRE citizenship clause of the 14th amendment. This is the simple truth you aren't honest enough to admit. Why else do these courts keep bringing up citizen parents??
And it's already been shown several times that you don't understand what you're quoting in this passage or that you're simply lying about it. It's time for you to admit the truth. Namecalling doesn't stop you from being wrong on this. You know I'm right. It's time to admit it. You've been schooled over and over and over and over. /i