As stated before, at the time of the Revolutionary War it was recognized that “We the People” (each person) was sovereign. Notice that no constitution [State or federal] every provided the people with any rights. The people possessed these rights before the Constitution was formed. And in fact it was the existence of these rights that gave the people the authority to form a constitution [state or federal]. The existence and recognition of preexistence rights can be found in The Magna Carta (June 15, 1215); the Declaration of Rights in Congress, at New York (October 19, 1765); the Declaration of Rights in Congress, at Philadelphia (October 14, 1774); the Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776); the Articles of Confederation (November 15, 1777); and the Bill of Rights inclusive of the 9th and 10th Amendments (December 15, 1791), etc. Throughout these documents, it can be seen that the people are not subservient to the government but rather that the government is subservient to the people.

The Constitution for the United States of America uses the word “Citizens” five times: article 1 section 2 clause 2 (A1.S2.2), article 1 section 3 clause 3 (A1.S2.3), article 2 section 1 clause 5 (A2.S1.5), article 3 section 2 clause 1 (A3.S2.1) , article 4 section 2 clause 1 (A4.S2.1), and the 11th Amendment (11th). All five instances contain the quote “Citizen of the United States”. You will notice below that Citizens is capitalized and it signifies the sovereignty of the people.

The first three occurrences of “Citizen of the United States” deal with qualifications for U. S. Representative, Senator and President, respectively. Since these provisions have never been amended, their meaning remains the same as it was on the day the Constitution was ratified.

A3.S2.1 deals with the jurisdiction of the federal courts. It grants federal courts authority in cases “between a State and Citizens of another State; - between Citizens of different States; - between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens, or Subjects.” Notice the limitation of authority that federal courts have. Any authority besides those specifically mentioned is not granted to the federal courts.

A4.S2 deals with the privileges and immunities of Citizens. It states “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” This clause gives the Citizens of each State the same rights as every other State. The fact that “State” is capitalized is in recognition of the Sovereignty of each state. That is, each State has sovereign authority over its own territory. This means the following:

“A citizen of one state is to be considered as a citizen of every other state in the union.” Butler v. Farnsworth, Federal Cases, Vol. 4, page 902 (1821)

So, prior the passage of the 14th Amendment, this is the only sense in which a natural born American was a citizen of the entire United States.

The 11th Amendment deals with protection of States’ right against Federal judicial power. It says “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.”

What we can concluded thus far can be summarized by the following quote:

“A citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. To conceive a citizen of the United States who is not a citizen of some one of the States, is totally foreign to the idea, and inconsistent with the proper construction and common understanding of the expression as used in the Constitution, which must be deduced from its various other provisions.” --- Ex parte. - Frank Knowles, California Reports, Vol. 5, page 302 (1855).

So we can see that by being a Citizen of a single State, we are Citizens of every State and thus a Citizen of the United States. So it is correct to say that we are Citizens of the several united States. The framers of the Constitution did not recognize the concept of being a citizen of the federal government.

Based upon this, we may ask what are our rights as Citizens of the United States. The Declaration of Independence gives a very concise answer to this question:

“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are crated equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” --- Declaration of Independence paragraph 2.

Another quote also states these rights and recognizes that by living in an orderly fashion with other men with men we must restrain our rights somewhat:

“When men entered into a State they yielded a part of their absolute rights, or natural liberty, for political or civil liberty, which is no other than natural liberty restrained by human laws, so far as is necessary and expedient for the general advantage of the public. The rights of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring and protecting reputation and property, - and, in general, of attaining objects suitable to their condition, without injury to another, are the rights of a citizen; and all men by nature have them.” --- Douglass, Adm’r., v. Stephens, Delaware Chancery, Vol. 1, Page 470 (1821).

So our study thus far leaves us in a desirable condition of being sovereign Citizens of our respective States and of the united States. This condition was well summarized by Senator John Calhoun:

“The Senator from Delaware (Mr. Clayton), as well as others, has relied with great emphasis on the fact that we are citizens of the United States. I do not object to the expression, nor shall I detract from the proud and elevated feelings with which it is associated; but I trust that I may be permitted to raise the inquiry, In what manner are we citizens of the United States? without weakening the patriotic feeling with which, I trust, it will ever be uttered. If by citizen of the United States he means a citizen at large, one whose citizenship extends to the entire geographical limits of the country, without having a local citizenship in some State or territory, a sort of citizen of the world, all I have to say is, that such a citizen would be a perfect nondescript; that not a single individual of this description can be found in the entire mass of our population. Notwithstanding all the pomp and display of eloquence on the occasion, every citizen is a citizen of some State or territory, and, as such, under and express provision of the constitution, is entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and it is in this, and in no other sense, that we are citizens of the United States.” --- Speech by Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina on the Force Bill, February 16, 1833, reprinted in “Union and Liberty, The Political Philosophy of John C. Calhoun,” edited by Ross M. Lence, Liberty Fund, 1992, Pg. 443-4.

One of the earliest Supreme Court decisions to explore the issue of citizenship was the Dred Scott case. The high court sought to define what a citizen was as compared to “people of the United State”. Their conclusion was that they were the same thing. They also affirmed that the people formed the sovereign body that is the real source of power in this nation.

“The words ‘people of the United States’ and ‘citizens’ are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the ‘sovereign people,’ and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty.

“We have the language of the Declaration of Independence and of the Articles of Confederation, in addition to the plain words of the Constitution itself:; we have the legislation of the different states, before, about the time, and since the Constitution was adopted; we have the legislation of Congress, from the time of its adoption to a recent period; and we have the constant and uniform action of the Executive Department, all concurring together, and leading to the same result. And if anything in relation to the construction of the Constitution can be regarded as settled, it is that which we now give to the word ‘citizen’ and the word ‘people.’” --- Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393 (1856).

So we conclude that the source of all sovereignty in a constitutional Republic such as the 50 States, which are united under the Constitution for the United States of America, is the People themselves. The States, and the federal government are both bound by the terms of a contract known as the U.S. Constitution. This contract contains a set of delegated powers which ultimately originate in the sovereignty of the Creator, who endowed individual people like you and me, with sovereignty in that likeness of the Creator. I think it is fair to say that the Supreme Court of the United States was never more eloquent when it described the source of sovereignty as follows:

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. And the law is the definition and limitation of power. It is indeed, quite true, that there must always be lodged somewhere, and in some person or body, the authority of final decision; and in many cases of mere administration the responsibility is purely political, no appeal except to the ultimate tribunal of the public judgment, exercised either in the pressure of opinion or by means of the suffrage. But the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, considered as individual possessions, are secured by those maxims of constitutional law which are the monuments showing the victorious progress of the race in securing to men the blessings of civilization under the reign of just and equal laws, so that, in the famous language of the Massachusetts Bill of Rights, the government of the commonwealth “may be a government of laws and not of men.” For, the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself.” --- Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370 (1886).

A more recent case reiterates the same point in terse and precise language.

“In the United States, sovereignty resides in the people who act through the organs established by the Constitution. [case cites omitted] The Congress as the instrumentality of sovereignty is endowed with certain powers to be exerted on behalf of the people in the manner and with the effect the Constitution ordains. The Congress cannot invoke the sovereign power of the people to override their will as thus declared.” --- Perry v. United States, 294 U.S. 330, 353 (1935)] Republic vs. Democracy.