” St Kitts citizenship by investment of the Constitution of the United States, ratified in 1868, results in or at the very least acknowledges for the 1st time a citizenship of the United States, as distinct from that of the states.” Black’s Legislation Dictionary, 5th Edition, p. 591 [1979].
The remedy is certainly not.
In fact the top and managing case on Condition Citizenship and United States Citizenship is the Supreme Court docket scenario, The Slaughter-Home Circumstances (sixteen Wallace 36: 21 L.Ed. 394 [1873]). In this circumstance, the Supreme Courtroom distinguishes among Point out Citizenship and United States Citizenship.
“It is pretty clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a condition, which are unique from every other and which rely on different characteristics of the individual.” The Slaughter-Dwelling Instances: eighty three U.S. 36, seventy four.
“The value of the circumstance can rarely be overestimated. By distinguishing amongst point out citizenship and countrywide citizenship and by emphasizing that the legal rights and privileges of federal citizenship do not contain the security of normal civil liberties this sort of as freedom of speech and push, religion, and so forth., but only the privileges which a person enjoys by advantage of his federal citizenship, the Court averted, for the time remaining at the very least, the revolution in our constitutional technique evidently meant by the framers of the amendment and reserved to the states the obligation for preserving civil rights generally.” Instances In Constitutional Law by Robert F. Cushman, 5th Version, pp. 250-251 (College or university Law Textbook) [1979].
“Citizenship is elaborated in two privileges and immunities clauses of the United States Constitution. . . . The Slaughter-Household Scenarios [1873] eighty three U.S. 36, 21 L.Ed. 394, emphasized the distinctive character of federal and point out citizenship. Slaughter-Home held that privileges and immunities conferred by state citizenship have been outside federal achieve through the Fourteenth Modification. . . . Federal citizenship was observed as together with only this sort of points as interstate travel and voting. Whilst subsequent choices have extended the meaning of citizenship in the Fourteenth Amendment, Slaughter-Residence is however managing in that it precludes use of privileges and immunities language in guarding citizens by federal authority.” Constitutional Law Deskbook – Personal Legal rights, by Chandler, Enslen, Renstrom 2nd Version, p. 634 (Lawyers Cooperative Publishing, 1993).
“The Fourteenth Amendment did not obliterate the distinction involving countrywide and state citizenship, but instead preserved it. Slaughter-House Cases.” 103d Congress, 1st Session, Doc 103-six: The Constitution of the United States of The united states Evaluation And Interpretation: Annotations Of Scenarios Resolved By The Supreme Courtroom Of The United States To June 29, 1992, p. 1566. 1
In addition, the Supreme Courtroom in The Slaughter-Home Cases concluded that there are two citizens under the Constitution of the United States:
“The following observation is more significant in perspective of the arguments of counsel in the existing scenario. It is, that the distinction concerning citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a Point out is evidently regarded and founded.
It is rather crystal clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States, and a citizenship of a Point out, which are distinct from each other, and which count on unique attributes or conditions in the unique.
We consider this distinction and its express recognition in this Modification of excellent body weight in this argument, for the reason that the upcoming paragraph of this very same part, which is the 1 largely relied on by the plaintiffs in error, speaks only of privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, and does not talk of those people of citizens of the a number of States. The argument, however, in favor of the plaintiffs rests wholly on the assumption that the citizenship is the same, and the privileges and immunities certain by the clause are the very same.
The language is, ‘No Point out shall make or enforce any regulation which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.’ It is a minor impressive, if this clause was supposed as a safety to the citizen of a Condition versus the legislative energy of his have Condition, that the term citizen of the State should really be remaining out when it is so diligently applied, and utilized in contradistinction to citizens of the United States, in the really sentence which precedes it. It is also obvious for argument that the adjust in phraseology was adopted understandingly and with a function.