Dan Goodman

The sixth in a series on blunders made by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this article the case of Chirac v. Lessee of A. F. Chirac et. al. (15 U.S. (Wheat. 2) 259, 1817) is selected. The blunder made is that Congress, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, has been given the power of naturalization under the Constitution. However, it is shown that the Constitution of the United States of America only gives to Congress the power to prescribe the rule of naturalization for the several States. Such a rule relates to residency within a State of the Union.

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 has been defined to have both fundamental privileges and immunities as well as common privileges and immunities. After the adoption of the Constitution of the United States of America, there were two trains of thought regarding the privileges and immunities protected under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The first was that the privileges and immunities protected were fundamental privileges and immunities. The second was that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 granted common privileges and immunities to the citizens of sister States when they were in another State. The Supreme Court of the United States eventually took up the task of defining the privileges and immunities contained in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1. In Paul v. State of Virginia, the Supreme Court stated that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution protected common privileges and immunities. However, in Ward v. State of Maryland, the Supreme Court of the United States, took the position that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 described fundamental privileges and immunities. It was in the Slaughterhouse Cases, where the Supreme Court of the United States finally defined the privileges and immunities in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The Slaughterhouse Court defined privileges and immunities under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America to include fundamental privileges and immunities AS WELL AS common privileges and immunities.

The fifth in a series on blunders made by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this article the case of Colgate v. Harvey (296 U.S. 404, 1935) is presented. The blunder made is that a citizen of the United States is a citizen of a State under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. However, it is shown that a citizen of the United States is a citizen of a State under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, not Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

The fourth in a series on blunders made by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this article the case of Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization et. al. (307 U.S. 496, 1939) is reviewed. The blunder made is that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States has only common privileges and immunities. It is shown that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 has both common privileges and immunities as well as fundamental privileges and immunities.

There is a citizen of the United States, and a citizen of a State who is not a citizen of the United States. Legal authority quoted, cited and linked.

There are two state citizens under the Constitution of the United States of America. One is at Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The other is at Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Legal authority quoted, cited, and linked.

A citizen of a State who is not a citizen of the United States is entitled to privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America, and is therefore also a citizen of the several States, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause of the Constitution. Legal authority quoted, cited and linked.

Your King Sago Palm has the Asian Cycad Scale on it. How can you get rid of it. Coffee beans. The reason coffee beans work is that they contain caffeine. Caffeine is a natural pesticide.

Having problems with your trees and shrubs? Maybe the information in this article will be of help. Problems such as what to do when you tree falls forward to the ground during a rain storm are covered. My wish is that one will choose to use the knowledge I have acquired in dealing with these problems.

The bark on the lower truck of your tree is missing. How did this happen? If you have a lawn / yard service, the culprit is a mechanical device; that is, an electric or gas trimmer / edger. Such a device does not have a clear guard which goes around it (360 degrees).

The road to freedom for the Black Man (Woman), whose ancestors were slaves at the adoption of the Constitution, has been difficult at best. Three attempts have been made to give this class of people the same rights, privileges and immunities as those whose ancestors were citizens or made citizens at the adoption of the Constitution. The first attempt, to make them citizens of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, was not successful. The reason was given by the Supreme Court in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. The second attempt, to make them citizens of the United States, was also not successful. The reason was given beforehand in the case of In re Frank Knowles. The third attempt, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to make them citizens of the United States and citizens of a State, was a partial success. However, they lacked the fundamental privileges and immunities under Corfield v. Coryell. The author provides a solution to this problem. Change Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution.

The first in a series of two articles on blunders made by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this article the case of United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation (299 U.S. 304, 1936) is analyzed. The blunder made is that sovereignty passed from Great Britain to the United Colonies when the Declaration of Independence was passed. However, it is shown that sovereignty passed from Great Britain upon the treaty of September 23, 1783, and not the Declaration of Independence, and that sovereignty passed to the States (Independent States) and not the United Colonies.

The second in a series of two articles on blunders made by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this article the case of McColloch v. State of Maryland (17 U.S. 316, 1819) is examined. The blunder made is that Congress under the "necessary and proper" clause has implied powers. Reference to THE FEDERALIST PAPERS is made to show that Congress does not have implied powers under this provision, however, that the provision only authorizes Congress to pass necessary and proper laws for executing the powers granted to it under the Constitution.

Authoritative definition for the term "citizen of a State." Legal sources, including cases from the Supreme Court of the United States, are cited and linked.

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of Constitution was modified by the Fourteenth Amendment, in particular, Section 1, Clause 2. This was determined by the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Slaughterhouse Cases. A citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, is entitled to privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States AND entitled to privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States. Privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States are still common privileges and immunities. Privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States are fundamental privileges and immunities. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America should read: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the Privileges and Immunities of Citizens IN and OF the several States." Cites and quotes to cases from the Supreme Court of the United States included.

Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America states: "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." By force of Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, a citizen of the United States can become also a citizen of a State. As such, a citizen of the United States would be, in this case, a citizen of the United States AND a citizen of a State. Or, in other words, a citizen of the United States resident in a State. Citizenship in a particular State, therefore, is based on residence.

Before the Fourteenth Amendment, there was only a citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America. Such a citizen was also a citizen of the United States, under the law of nations (international law). However, in the Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), the Supreme Court decided that because of the Fourteenth Amendment, citizenship of a State was to be separate and distinct from citizenship of the United States. A citizen of a State was to be considered as separate and distinct from a citizen of the United States. One can be a citizen of the United States and not a citizen of a State. And, one can be a citizen of a State and not a citizen of the United States. So there is a citizen of a State and also a citizen of the United States. In addition, there are now two citizens, a citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America and also a citizen of the United States, under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. A citizen of the United States can become also a citizen of a State, under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. In such case then there would be a citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution and also a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a State, under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, in any State of the Union, there are two State citizens, a citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and also a citizen of a State (and a citizen of the United States), under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The only difference between them is that a citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, is one born in a State of the Union; that is a native born citizen whereas a citizen of a State, under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, is also a citizen of the United States residing in a particular State.

Before the Fourteenth Amendment, there was only a citizen of a State and a citizen of the United States. One born in a State of the Union, was, in general, a citizen of that particular State. As such he or she was entitled to the special privileges and immunities of that particular State, and was entitled to the common privileges and immunities of citizens of another State in which he or she was in, and had fundamental privileges and immunities recognized under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1. A citizen of a State, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, before the Fourteenth Amendment, was recognized as a citizen of the United States, under international law. However, the Fourteenth Amendment transferred a citizen of the United States (with its common privileges and immunities) from Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution to Section 1, Clause 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. A citizen of the United States is still recognized as such, under international law. A citizen of a State is not. The solution was to create another citizen under the Constitution, which would be recognized under international law as such. The Supreme Court, in the Slaughterhouse Cases, decided to modified Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, to give effect to the Fourteenth Amendment. One word was changed. In Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 "citizens in the several States" was changed to "citizens of the several States". Thus, there are now privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States at Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. Privileges and immunities of a citizen of a State are to be found in the constitution and laws of a particular State. While privileges and immunities of a citizen of the United States are located at Section 1, Clause 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Therefore, there is now a citizen of the United States and also a citizen of the several States.

Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States (of America) provides that "[t]he judicial Power shall extend to controversies between Citizens of different States" as well as to controversies between citizens of a State and "foreign States, citizens or subjects." Jurisdiction then of the courts of the United States is declared to extend to controversies between "citizens of different States" as well as to controversies between citizens of a State and "foreign States, citizens or subjects." The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted on July 28, 1868. Did the amendment affect or modify Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States (of America). The answer is no. Robertson v. Cease: 97 U.S. 646 (1878). A citizen of the United States, therefore, is to aver that he or she is a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a State in a legal proceeding in a federal court. Steigleider v. McQuesten: 198 U.S. 141 (1905). While a citizen of a State is to aver that he or she is a citizen of a State. Steigleider v. McQuesten, supra. A citizen of a State is to aver also that he or she is a citizen of the several States. See Footnote 6 of the article for legal authority.

Before the Fourteenth Amendment, one was considered a citizen of a State as well as a citizen of the United States. After the Fourteenth Amendment one changed to being either a citizen of a State OR a citizen of the United States. Since a citizen of the United States can be also a citizen of a State, under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, then there are now two state citizens in every State of the Union. Legal authority quoted, cited, and linked.

Since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, there are three sets of privileges and immunities. Privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States are located at Section 1, Clause 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Privileges and immunities of citizens of a State are to be found in the constitution and laws of the individual State (McKane v. Durston, 153 U.S. 684, at 687 1894). Privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States are designated at Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution (Hodges v. United States, 203 U.S. 1, at 15 1906; Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 (16 Wall.) 36, at 75 thru 76 1873). Privileges and immunities of a citizen of the United States arise "out of the nature and essential character of the Federal government, and granted or secured by the Constitution." (Duncan v. State of Missouri, 152 U.S. 377, 382 1894). Privileges and immunities of a citizen of a State are to be found with the individual State's constitution and laws. (McKane v. Durston, supra). Privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States are those described in Corfield v. Coryell by Mr. Justice Washington. (Hodges v. United States, supra). A citizen of the United States is entitled to privileges and immunities of a citizen of a State under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. A citizen of a State is entitled to privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution (Harris v. Balk, 198 U.S. 215, at 223 1905). A citizen of the United States is not entitled to privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States, and a citizen of the several States is not entitled to privileges and immunities of a citizen of the United States. Therefore, there is now a citizen of the United States AND a citizen of a State under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment; and also a citizen of a State AS WELL AS a citizen of the several States under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution.

Before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, one was considered a citizen of a State as well as a citizen of the United States. As such, one owe allegiance to both the individual State government as well as the United States government. After the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment; in the Slaughterhouse Cases, it was held that citizenship of a State was separate and distinct from citizenship of the United States. That a citizen of a State was separate and distinct from a citizen of the United States. Now a citizen of a State owes allegiance to the individual State government while a citizen of the United States owes allegiance to the United States government. A citizen of the United States, in addition, as a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a State, owes allegiance to the individual State government and the United States government. Quotes and cites to cases of the Supreme Court of the United States included.

With the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment on July 28 1868, there are now two state citizens under the Constitution of the United States (of America). One state citizen is, under Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, a citizen of the United States. The other state citizen is, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, a citizen of the several States. In addition, there is a state citizen, with privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States; under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution and there is a state citizen, with privileges and immunities of a citizen of the United States; under Section 1, Clause 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment (Chadwick v. Kelley: 187 U.S. 540).

In the brief filed with the Supreme Court of the United States, Petitioners argue to overturn the Slaughterhouse Cases in reference to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. What Petitioners failed to see in their references to the Slaughterhouse Cases was that there were two citizens the Court was referring to, and not one. The Petitioners also failed to see that Section 1, Clause 1 and Section 1, Clause 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment were treated differently by the Slaughterhouse court. The purported quote of Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 (OF) was nothing unusual in Slaughterhouse. And, the Petitioners also make the erroneous conclusion about a citizen of a State being the same as a citizen of the several States.

The Slaughterhouse Cases is best known for reading the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment out of the Constitution. However, the case is also known for deciding that citizenship of a State was to be separate and distinct from citizenship of the United States. This, of cou...

The Fourteenth Amendment created not one, but two citizens under the Constitution of the United States (of America): "Consequently, one who is created a citizen of the United States, is certainly not made a citizen of any particular State. It follows, that as it is only the citizens of the State who are entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States, . . . then a distinction both in name and privileges is made to exist between citizens of the United States, ex vi termini, and citizens of the respective (several) States." Ex parte Frank Knowles: 5 Cal. 300, at page 304 (1855). This article shows the legal reasoning to this conclusion.

In today's world one has less time to do the basic things, like prepare meals. In this article find out how you can prepare meals quickly that are right for you.

Having problems with your trees and shrubs? Maybe the information in this article will be of help. Problems such as heat stress and sun scorch (leaf scorch) are covered. My wish is that one will choose to use the knowledge I have acquired in dealing with these problems.

A natural (native) born citizen is one who is born with the territory of a government (country) and subject to its jurisdiction. Under the Constitution of the United States; at Article II, Section 5, Clause 1; a natural born citizen is a person born in the United States of America; in a different state, before the adoption of the Constitution of the United States and under the Articles of Confederation or a person born in the United States of America, in an individual State, under the Constitution of the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment created two citizens under the Constitution of the United States; a citizen of the several States, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 and a citizen of the United States, under the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment. The proper question to be asked is if a citizen of the United States, after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, can be considered a natural born citizen (native born citizen), under the Constitution of the United States, eligible to be President of the United States of America?

This article will show that since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court has made clear that there are two citizens under the Constitution of the United States, a citizen of the United States and a citizen of the several States.

Did you know that there is only one official source for the opinions of the United States Supreme Court? That, in some instances, a dual citation of an opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States is necessary? That there are bench opinions, slip opinions, preliminary print opinions? Find out all you need to know about researching opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States in this article.

Ready to take that trip. You are. However, is your car? Find out what you should have with you in your car for your car for your trip.

Justice Bushrod Washington´s determination of the Privileges and Immunities clause of Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States is still the first, and leading opinion, on this clause of the Constitution. Corfield before and after the Fourteenth Amendment relates to Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States, but now it describes the privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States, whereas before the Fourteenth Amendment, it described the privileges and immunities a citizen of one state had in another State.

Because of an oversight by the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court, in the Slaughterhouse Cases, concluded that the Fourteenth Amendment created two separate and distinct citizens under the Constitution of the United States, rather then one. The oversight relates to the holding of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case. Because of a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases, state citizenship has been related to privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States. This is incorrect.

There appears to be a misunderstanding by some relating State citizenship to privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States. This is understandable since this conclusion is based on a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases.

Previous articles of mine have analyzed the Slaughterhouse Cases, primarily, in showing that there are indeed two citizens under the Constitution of the United States since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment and the decision of the Supreme Court in the Slaughterhouse Cases. This article will show that since the Slaughterhouse Cases, there are two citizens under the Constitution of the United States.

By force of the Fourteenth Amendment, a citizen of the United States residing in a state of the Union becomes a citizen of that state. A citizen of the several States domicile in an individual state becomes by Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1, a citizen of that state. Therefore, a citizen of the United States and a citizen of the several States, being citizens of a State, can under the Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 2, Clause 7 (Citizens of different States), sue one another if they are a citizen of a different State of the Union.

The Fourteenth Amendment was passed by the 39th Congress on June 13, 1866. Known as the "Reconstruction Amendment(s)" (one of three, the other two being the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments) it contains five sections. Its main purpose was to make black slaves, freed under the Thirteenth Amendment, citizens under the Constitution of the United States. Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment modified Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States. In addition, Section 1, Clause 2 changed the wording in Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

Justice Tanney, in the Dred Scott case, discussed how a State of the Union could indeed declare who may be a citizen. The State of Maine was referred to in the opinion as an example. However, such a citizen (in this case, a Negro of slave descent) could not qualify as a citizen of the several States under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution. The only way a Negro of slave descent could become a citizen under the Constitution of the United States was through an amendment to the Constitution. This was accomplished with the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, the Fourteenth Amendment also changed citizenship under the Constitution. After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court of the United States decided in the Slaughterhouse Cases that because of the Fourteenth Amendment there were now two separate and distinct citizens under the Constitution of the United States (and not the Fourteenth Amendment); a citizen of the United States and a citizen of the several States.

Having problems with your trees and shrubs? Maybe the information in this article will be of help. Problems such as mold, algae, fungus, lichens, ball moss are covered. My wish is that one will choose to use the knowledge I have acquired in dealing with these problems.

This is the companion to my series of articles on the Slaughterhouse Cases and Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. Entitled "Mistake in the Syllabus" it shows a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases with a footnote to the Slaughterhouse Cases opinion itself.

"Slaughterhouse Cases, Up Close" is the second in a series of articles on the Slaughterhouse Cases and Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. The first article is "Slaughterhouse Cases, Two Citizens." The third, "Two Citizens Under The Constitution." The last in this series is "Privileges and Immunities of a Citizen of the several States." A companion completes the set. Entitled "Mistake in the Syllabus" it shows a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases with a footnote to the Slaughterhouse Cases opinion itself.

"Privileges and Immunities of a Citizen of the several States" is the last in a series of articles on the Slaughterhouse Cases and Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. The first article is "Slaughterhouse Cases, Two Citizens." The next, "Slaughterhouse Cases, Up Close." The third in this series is "Two citizens under the Constitution." A companion completes the set. Entitled "Mistake in the Syllabus" it shows a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases with a footnote to the Slaughterhouse Cases opinion itself.

"Two citizens under the Constitution" is the third in a series of articles on the Slaughterhouse Cases and Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. The first article is "Slaughterhouse Cases, Two Citizens." The next, "Slaughterhouse Cases, Up Close." The last in this series is "Privileges and Immunities of a Citizen of the several States." A companion completes the set. Entitled "Mistake in the Syllabus" it shows a mistake in the Syllabus to the Slaughterhouse Cases with a footnote to the Slaughterhouse Cases opinion itself.

"Slaughterhouse Cases, Two Citizens" is the first in a series of articles on the Slaughterhouse Cases and Citizenship under the Constitution of the United States. The second article is "Slaughterhouse Cases, Up Close." Two additional articles complete this series; they are "Two Citizens Under The Constitution" and "Privileges and Immunities of a Citizen of the several States."