Published in


Definition of Citizen

Understanding what it means to be a Citizen is a top 3 topic to examine in regards to International Law. Instead of me telling you what it is, let’s see what Governments and their Rulings say.

‘We The People’ is a capitonym. Only the signers of the Constitution and their designated posterior are Sovereign Members of the United States.

‘Our survey of the legal landscape as it existed in March 1989 indicates, that, in general, members of the public have no constitutional right to be protected by the State from harm inflicted by third parties’. [E.g., Fox v. Custis, 712 F.2d 84, 88 (4thCir. 1983); Wells v. Walker , 852 F.2d 368, 370 (8th Cir. 1988), cert. Denied, 489 U.S.1012, 109 S.Ct. 1121, 103 L.Ed.2d 184 (1989); Ketchum v. Alameda County, 811 F.2d1243, 1247 (9th Cir. 1987); Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616, 618 (7th Cir. 1982).]

The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties; it tells the state to let people alone; it does not require their agency federal government or the state to provide services, even so elementary a service as maintaining law and order (for those not a party to the contract). Thus, because there is no constitutional duty to provide such protection for the Public at Large, {the state’s} failure to do so is not actionable under Title 42, section 1983, of the United States Code (U.S.C.). (emphasis added)–Judge Posner in Bowers vs De Vito (1982)

But indeed, no person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact (contract), but he is not a party to it. — Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Alderman of the City of Savannah (1854).

“The People” does not include you and me. “The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual States. Each State established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated. The people of the United States framed such a government for the United States as they supposed best adapted to their situation and best calculated to promote their interests.” [Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243]

No constitutional right exists under the Ninth Amendment, or to any other provision of the Constitution of the United States, “…to trust the Federal Government and to rely on the integrity of its pronouncements.” [MAPCO, Inc. v Carter (1978, Em CtApp) 573 F2d 1268, cert den 437 US 904, 57 L Ed 2d 1134, 98 S Ct 3090.]

“…at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects…with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.”CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA(US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455@DALL 179pp471–472

Prosecutor may violate civil rights in initiating prosecution and presenting case. — United States Supreme Court in Imbler v. Pachtmanz 424 U.S. 409 (1976)

Immunity extends to all activities closely associated with litigation or potential litigation. — Second Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Davis v. Grusemever, 996 F.2d 617 (1993)

Prosecutor may knowingly use false testimony and suppress evidence. — United States Supreme Court in Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976)

Prosecutor may file charges outside of his jurisdiction. — Eighth Circuit Federal Court of appeal in Myers v. Morris, 840 F.2d 1337 (1986)

Prosecutor may knowingly offer perjured testimony. — Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Jones v. Shankland, 800 F.2d 1310 (1987)

Prosecutor can suppress exculpatory evidence. (Exculpatory defined: Evidence showing one innocent) — Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Henzel v. Gertstein, 608 F.2d 654 (1979)

Prosecutors are immune from lawsuit for conspiring with judges to determine outcome of judicial proceedings. — Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Ashelman v. Pope, 793 E.2d 1072 (1986)

Prosecutor may knowingly file charges against innocent persons for a crime that never occurred. — Tenth Circuit Federal Court of Appeal in Norton v. Liddell, 620 F.2d 1375 (1980)

A fundamental principle of American law is that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen. — Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)

The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amount to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State. — Senate Document #43; Senate Resolution No 62 (Page 9, Paragraph 2, 1933)

Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors. — DeShaney v. Winnebago County (1989)

Ms. Gonzales did not have a “property interest” in enforcing the restraining order and that “such a right would not, of course, resemble any traditional conception of property.” — Castle Rock v Gonzalez (2005)

Official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection … this uniformly accepted rule rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen … a publicly maintained police force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit the community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good order. — Warren v. District of Columbia (444 A.2d 1, 1981)

Blacks Law 5th Edition page 1238 — Sovereign States are: States whose subjects or citizens are in the habit of obedience to them.

Blacks Law 5th Edition page 1252 — Sovereignty: The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which any independent state is governed; supreme political authority; paramount control of the constitution and frame of government and its administration…

Blacks Law 5th Edition page 1277 — Subject: Constitutional Law. One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws. The natives of Great Britain are subjects of the British government. Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws.

“Citizenship connotes membership in a political society and implies a duty of permanent allegiance to that society.” — David Weissbrodt, Immigration Law and Procedure in a Nutshell.

Eduardo Aguirre, Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Citizenship, is, by definition, a condition of allegiance to, and participation in, a governmental jurisdiction. It means, for a collective order, a pledge of loyalty, commitment to actively participate in civics and community, and willingness to serve when and where called upon. Citizenship begins within the individual but is nurtured by the country.

Blacks Law 5th Edition page 733 — The Law of Nations is International Law. “the law which regulates the intercourse of nations; the law of nations. The customary law which determines the rights and regulates the intercourse of independent nations in peace and war.”

The Law of Nations Book 1 Section 244 — Everything in the political society ought to tend to the good of the community; and since even the persons of the citizens are subject to this rule, their property cannot be excepted. The state could not subsist, or constantly administer the public affairs in the most advantageous manner, if it had not a power to dispose occasionally of all kinds of property subject to its authority. …When therefore the people confer the empire on any one, they at the same time invest him with the eminent domain, unless it be expressly reserved.

The Law of Nations Book 2 Section 81 — The property of the citizens is the property of the nation, with respect to foreign nations. Even the property of the individuals is, in the aggregate, to be considered as the property of the nation, with respect to other states. It, in some sort, really belongs to her, from the right she has over the property of her citizens, because it constitutes a part of the sum total of her riches, and augments her power. She is interested in that property by her obligation to protect all her members. In short, it cannot be otherwise, since nations act and treat together as bodies in their quality of political societies, and are considered as so many moral persons. All those who form a society, a nation being considered by foreign nations as constituting only one whole, one single person, — all their wealth together can only be considered as the wealth of that same person. And this is to true, that each political society may, if it pleases, establish within itself a community of goods, as Campanella did in his republic of the sun. Others will not inquire what it does in this respect: its domestic regulations make no change in its rights with respect to foreigners nor in the manner in which they ought to consider the aggregate of its property, in what way soever it is possessed.

The Law of Nations Book 2 Section 82 — A consequence of this principle. By an immediate consequence of this principle, if one nation has a right to any part of the property of another, she has an indiscriminate right to the property of the citizens of the latter nation until the debt be discharged. This maxim is of great use, as shall hereafter be shown.

Feb of 2022 at a Canadian hearing questioning the Husband of one of the lead organizers for the Trucker Protest in Ottawa in regards to lockdowns, masks, vaccines, etc.




The three levels of Self-Determinations: 1. Internal or introspective Self-Determination 2. External or outer intention Self-Determination (Coherence / Humanitarian Aid) 3. Separate and Equal Status of Self-Determination (International Law)

Recommended from Medium

12042020 :: Week in review

Of Course Social Media Sites Are Responsible For What’s Posted

A Collection of Appeals to Safeguard the U.S. Election Process

Businesses can now get money for some health costs, but there are downsides

On Oyedepo: Nigerians Christians need to chill, it’s not that deep

Shall Not Be Infringed…

Seeing and Raising Mark Zuckerberg’s Big Bet on ‘Global Community’

White House Sees Border Policy Failure as Success

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store


Introspection, Global Coherence, Humanitarian / Disability Aid, Ocean Clean-Up / Reforestation Charities, International Law and Privacy Coins.

More from Medium

Menstruators as the Other: False Binaries and Shame in Historical Discourse

Physical Disobedience as an Act of Revolution and Radical Self-Love

Living in Flux; The Power of Neighbourhoods

Out of Body