Posted on 11/19/2010 2:03:36 PM PST by bushpilot1
Several Chief Justices of the US Supreme Court have stated the Law of Nations (Vattel's) is "law of the land" is "imposed on the US" is "municipal law" is "domestic law".
A Founder,signer of the Declaration of Independence, Chief Justice McKean ruled the Law of Nations is municipal law in Pennsalvannia.
The Law of Nations played a vital role in our countrys founding, there is no need for me link the quotes of the Founders, the Judges and Historians on this thread. The information is available in this forum.
This is my suggestion..the state legislatures pass into law all presidential candiates sine qua non to the Law of Nations.
The Constitution states only a natural born citizen can become president. Vattels Law of Nations tells us what a natural born citizen is: Born from two citizen parents.
Suggest the 1797 edition. State legislatures lets get to work.
If Holder sues he will lose. The Law of Nations is Law.
“.a violation of the law of nations,” citing in this respect Vattel. “Upon the same principle” -to qoute from the argument as reported—”that the infringement of a statute is an indictable offence, though the mode of punishment is not pointed out in the act itself, an offence against the law of nations, while they compose a part of the law of the land, must necessarily be indictable.”
Chief Justice McKean, a man of large political and judicial experience and himself a signer of the Declaration of Independence, stated the trial to be a case of “first impression in the United States”; that it was to be determinded “on the principles of the law of nations, which form a part of the municipal law of Pennsylvania.”
The Catholic Conception of International Law, James Brown Scott; page 99
Would you cite where the Supreme Court has said Vattel’s Law of Nations is the law of the land?
Are you stating..when Law of Nations is in caps it refers to Vattel?
Do you want all of Vattel to be incorporated into U.S. law, or just your interpretation of that one sentence?
Are you stating..when Law of Nations is in caps it refers to Vattel?
You need context to determine whether capitalized “Law of Nations” is refering to the book by the Swiss international law scholar.
“jus gentium,” (Latin: “law of nations”), in legal theory, that law which natural reason establishes for all men, as distinguished from jus civile, or the civil law peculiar to one state or people. Roman lawyers and magistrates originally devised jus gentium as a system of equity applying to cases between foreigners and Roman citizens. The concept originated in the Romans’ assumption that any rule of law common to all nations must be fundamentally valid and just. They broadened the concept to refer to any rule that instinctively commended itself to their sense of justice.—Encyclopedia Britannica
In some cases it refers to Vattel’s Law of Nations. Do you agree?
The U. S. Constitution, in Article I, authorized Congress to define and punish “Offences against the Law of Nations.
What book is this?
From Federalist #42
THE second class of powers, lodged in the general government, consists of those which regulate the intercourse with foreign nations, to wit: to make treaties; to send and receive ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls; to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations; to regulate foreign commerce, including a power to prohibit, after the year 1808, the importation of slaves, and to lay an intermediate duty of ten dollars per head, as a discouragement to such importations.
In some cases it refers to Vattel’s Law of Nations. Do you agree?
The U. S. Constitution, in Article I, authorized Congress to define and punish “Offences against the Law of Nations.
What book is this?
The context of the phrase dictates that the Framers were talking about “jus gentium” in Latin, meaning international law dealing with acts of piracy committed in international waters on the high seas.
Joseph Story, “Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_10s14.html
I am saying..the Law of Nations...referred to in the Constitution and the Federalist you cited is Vattels Law of Nations.
When the Founders, Judges..refer to the law of nations..or Law of Nations you can bet it is Vattel.
One more item..the Law of Nations prevails. It is law of the land.
I am saying..the Law of Nations...referred to in the Constitution and the Federalist you cited is Vattels Law of Nations.
When the Founders, Judges..refer to the law of nations..or Law of Nations you can bet it is Vattel.
One more item..the Law of Nations prevails. It is law of the land.
This has been wishy washy for far too long.
Let states declare it, Let the Supremes shoot it down if they dare.
I think its a good idea.
I don’t think the same person signed Nancy Pelosi’s name, either. The signature is different between the non-submitted and submitted certification forms.
Maybe the mortgage crisis story about the robosigners plays a role in this somehow...the media claimed that legal liability would fall on those who forged signatures, even with permission - was this a way to keep them quiet?
How about this - Nancy Pelosi signed all 50 non-submitted certification forms. Someone else was asked to forge the signature on the 50 forms that were submitted. These were sent in, of course, with Pelosi’s knowledge. But if the SHTF, the 50 forms with her real signature will be miraculously found.
The president goes down, so does Biden, so do the forgers, and so does the “poor” fall guy who “fooled Pelosi into believing that Obama was qualified.” He’ll be the one who tricked Pelosi into signing the 50 forms “he had no intention of sending” while having a staffer or two forge her signature.
He thinks he has the upper hand, but he won’t be able to prove a thing. She signed the 50 aces in the hole behind his back. He has no idea about the force with which that knife will be plunged in his back.
Why else is Pelosi not worried? /tinfoil off
“prosecutions [were] to be instituted against all persons who shall within the cognizance of the courts of the United States, violate the Law of Nations” George Washington, April 22 1793
Law of Nations, Chapter XIX
The natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens.
Can understand why Washington would be concerned. “ A society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise.”
Why do you think everything that has ‘law of nations’ makes you think it refers to Vattel? What lunacy makes you think anything contrary to Vattel is a crime?
Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State wrote a letter to US Attorney William Rawle to apprehend and prosecute US citizens who violate the Law of Nations.
Jefferson believed the Law of Nations was part of the law of the land...rules every citizen must obey.
US Attorney General Lee in 1797, “The Law of Nations in its fullest extent is part of the law of the land.”
There are so many I could list who said the Law of Nations is a part of our laws or law of the land.
There is a big cover up going on.
Except that the full context makes it clear it is not. Reread the quote above (29) or follow the link: James Madison, father of the Constitution, makes it clear in the quote that it refers to relations with foreign powers.
Futher, toward the end of my quote, he does not capitalize "law of nations." The phrase "law of nations" dates back at least to ancient Roman times. The phrase was not unique to De Vattel, in the same way the title "Tort Law" might be used by several authors.
“Why do you think everything that has ‘law of nations’ makes you think it refers to Vattel? What lunacy makes you think anything contrary to Vattel is a crime?”
Tell that to the Supremes (2003) who referred to Vattel 6 times in Sosa v Alvarez, 542 U.S. 692, 729-30. “For two centuries we have affirmed that the domestic law of the United States recognizes the Law of Nations”
Law of Nations Chapter XIX
The natural born citizens are those born from citizens parents. A society cannot perpetuate other wise. A society should desire this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.