Now, let’s return to our study of the term “citizen” in the Constitution. The next mention of “citizen” in the Constitution is a clear departure from previous occurrences and represents when things began to go terribly wrong. This occurrence appears in the 14th Amendment and it is the first time that the word is not capitalized. Section 1 says in part:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ...”

This amendment was (supposedly) adopted during the reconstruction period following the Civil War.

The change from “Citizen” to “citizen” signifies that a second class of citizenship was created. A “Citizen of each State” is a sovereign person. A “citizen of the United States” is a subject of the federal government which has sovereignty over him. There were several important legal cases after the 14th Amendment which recognized two classes of citizens.

“We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several states. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own who owe it allegiance, and whose rights, within its jurisdiction, it must protect. The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a state, but his rights of citizenship under one of these governments will be different from those he has under the other.” --- United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875).

“It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a state, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual.” --- Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 16 Wall. 36; 21 L.Ed. 394 (1873).

“That there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a state, and the privileges and immunities of one are not the same as the other is well established by the decisions of the courts of this country. The leading cases upon the subjects are those decided by the Supreme Court of the United States and reported in 16 Wall. 36, 21 L. Ed. 394, and known as the Slaughter House Cases.” --- K. Tashiro v. Jordan, 256 P. 545, 549 (1927); affirmed 278 U.S. 123 (1928).

Before discussing the 14th Amendment in detail, it might be helpful to discover who the author was and a little about his background. The 14th Amendment was introduced into U.S. House by Thaddeus Stevens, congressman from Pennsylvania and into the Senate by William Pitt Fessenden. But the language for the amendment was written by Robert Dale Owen who was a naturalized citizen from England. Robert Dale Owen’s father, Robert Owen, was the acknowledged father of British socialism.

The two men that introduced the proposed amendment had both worked for Robert Owen’s communistic Harmony Society. In 1827, Robert Dale Owen founded The Free Inquirer, which was said to be a socialistic publication. He was later elected to the Illinois legislature, served as ambassador to Italy and spent the end of his life devoted to abolitionism, socialism and spiritualism (talking with the dead).

After the amendment was proposed by a two-thirds vote of both houses of the US Congress, it was passed on to the States for a vote. Debate on the 14th Amendment is several state legislatures (Indiana, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, North Caroline, South Carolina, Mississippi, Maryland) made it clear that the representative understood the affect the amendment would have upon the country. They understood that it was socialist in nature and that it would shift the balance of power away from the States toward the federal government.

Following the alleged ratification of the 14th Amendment by the States, the formal practice of birth registration was begun. It was done under the guise of conducting a census every ten years. Births were recorded in the Bureau Of The Census which is in the Department of Commerce. Prior to this time, birth certificates were only issued to the children of slaves (who obviously were not sovereigns). These birth certificates recorded the births of “citizens of the United States”, the newly created class of citizens.

These citizens were and remain subjects of the federal government and are not sovereigns. You will recall that the 14th Amendment refers to “privileges or immunities”. This is not the same the Bill of Rights granted to the citizens of the various states. Here are some quotes that provide proof of this loss of sovereignty:

“A person is born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States...if his birth occurs in territory over which the United States is sovereign, even though another country provides all governmental services within the territory and the territory is subsequently ceded to the other country.” --- 3Am Jur 2d, section 141.

“The word ‘citizen’ as used in the 14th Amendment is used in a political sense to designate one who has the rights and privileges of a citizen of a state, or of the United States and does not mean the same things as a resident, inhabitant or person.” --- 3Am Jur 2d, section 1412, pg 659.

“Of the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States, and of the privileges and immunities of the citizen of the state, ... it is only the former which are placed by this clause under the protection of the federal Constitution, and that the latter, whatever they may be, are not intended to have any additional protection by this paragraph of the amendment.” --- Slaughterhouse Cases, (1862) 16 Wall 72, 83 U.S. 407.

“Privileges and immunities clause of Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights peculiar to being citizen of federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship.” --- Jones v. Temmer, Federal Supplement, Vol. 829, Page 1227 (1993).

“Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state.” --- Crosse v Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A. 2d 433.

“Citizenship is a political status, and may be defined and privilege limited by Congress.” --- Ex Parte (NG) Fung Sing, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 6, Page 670 (1925).

Several things are obvious from these quotes:

• there are two classes of citizens

• everyone born after the 14th Amendment passed was a “citizen of the United States”,

• the federal government can grant and therefore take away privileges to “citizens of the United States”

• the 14th Amendment only protects the rights of “citizens of the United States” (federal citizens)

• “Citizens of each State” (State Citizens) have different rights (meaning superior Sovereign rights) than federal citizens.

A person’s citizenship is the basis of their relationship with the government. Everything about the relationship is built upon their citizenship status. Since the 14th Amendment created a new class of citizenship as a privilege (rather than unalienable rights), there is the potential to regulate every aspect of the citizen’s life. The most startling fact of all is that this new class of citizen does not have the right to invoke the protections of the Bill of Rights, as explained in the following Supreme Court case:

“We have cited these cases for the purpose of showing that the privileges and
immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights
protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal Constitution against the
powers of the Federal government. They were decided subsequently to the adoption
of the Fourteenth Amendment...” --- Maxwell v. Dow, 176 US 598 (1900).

Well, if federal citizens only have enjoy the Bill of Rights, what “privileges and immunities” do they enjoy? The following court cases will answer this question:

“Privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, on the other hand, are only such as arise out of the nature and essential character of the national government, or are specifically granted or secured to all citizens or persons by the Constitution for the United States." --- Slaughter-House Cases, supra, p.79; Re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 448, 34 L.ed. 519, 524, 10 Sup. Ct.Rep. 930; Duncan v. Missouri, 152 U.S. 377, 382, 38 L.ed. 485, 487, 14 Sup.Ct.Rep. 570.

"Thus, among the rights and privileges of national citizenship recognized by this court are the right to pass freely from state to state (Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 18 L.ed. 75); the right to petition Congress for a redress of grievances (United States v. Cruikshank, supra); the right to vote for national officers (Ex parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 651, 28 L.ed. 274, 4 Sup.Ct.Rep. 152; Wiley v. Sinkler, 179 U.S. 58, 45 L.ed. 84, 21 Sup.Ct. Rep. 17); the right to be protected against violence while in the lawful custody of a United States marshal (Logan v. United States, 144 U.S. 263, 36 L.ed. 429, 12 Sup.Ct. Rep. 617); and the right to inform the United States authorities of violation of its laws (Re Quark, 158 U.S. 532, 39 L.ed. 1080, 15 Sup.Ct.Rep. 959)." --- Twining v. New Jersey, 211 US 78 (1908)

It should be obvious from this list that the rights of a federal citizen are far less than those of an State Citizen. The rights of a State Citizen are wide open and are only restricted by the limited powers of the federal government. But, the rights of a federal citizen are few and specifically listed.

The most important thing to note about the 14th Amendment is that it did not have any effect on sovereign State Citizens. This means that you have the opportunity to reclaim your right to be a sovereign State Citizen. You can remain as you are, a federal citizen with limited rights, or you can choose to reclaim you sovereignty. We would suggest that you begin to act as if you are a sovereign.