Comment: What does "United States"

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: The 14th Amendment DOES NOT (see in situ)

What does "United States"

What does "United States" mean in the 14th Amendment?

If you dont know 100% then dont presume!!

What does "united States" mean in the 18th Amendment?

as soon as your parent fills out the birth certificate declaring your birth in the UNITED STATES, (as opposed to the united States of America) you are presumed to be a federal person subject to FEDERAL jurisdiction. There is no MANDATORY REQUIREMENT for a birth certificate, so it is presumed to be a knowing and willful act of filling out the form.

The U.S. Birth Certificate is THE MAIN EVIDENCE of birth "within the UNITED STATES"

    (b) Evidence . (1) An applicant under this section shall establish eligibility under 8 CFR 320.2. An applicant must submit the following required documents unless such documents are already contained in USCIS administrative file(s): (Introductory text revised effective 11/28/11, 76 FR 53764)

    (i) The child's birth certificate or record;

    § 51.42 Persons born in the United States applying for a passport for the first time.

    (a) Primary evidence of birth in the United States. A person born in the United States generally must submit a birth certificate. The birth certificate must show the full name of the applicant, the applicant's place and date of birth, the full name of the parent(s), and must be signed by the official custodian of birth records, bear the seal of the issuing office, and show a filing date within one year of the date of birth.

Real Citizens dont need certificates of birth. Nor do Real Citizens need to Register their private property.

The 14th Amendment had ONE purpose, to create a new limited type of citizenship for the newly freed slaves. Free men need not rely on the 14th for status of citizenship, BUT if you do, you will be considered one. This is why ONLY "involuntary" servitude was banned in the 13th. Voluntary servitude is completely constitutional.

    "It is claimed that the plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and of this State. Undoubtedly she is. It is argued that she became such by force of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, already recited. This, however, is a mistake. It could as well be claimed that she became free by the effect of the Thirteenth Amendment, by which slavery was abolished; for she was no less a citizen than she was free before the adoption of either of these amendments. No white person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, or born without those limits, and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes the status of citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution. “The history and aim of the Fourteenth Amendment is well known, and the purpose had in view in its adoption well understood. That purpose was to confer the status of citizenship upon a numerous class of persons domiciled within the limits of the United States, who could not be brought within the operation of the naturalization laws because native born, and whose birth, though native, had at the same time left them without the status of citizenship. These persons were not white persons, but were, in the main, persons of African descent, who had been held in slavery in this country, or, if having themselves never been held in slavery, were the native-born descendents of slaves. Prior to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment it was settled that neither slaves, nor those who had been such, nor the descendants of these, though native and free born, were capable of becoming citizens of the United States. (Dread Scott v. Sanford, 19 How. 393). The Thirteenth Amendment, though conferring the boon of freedom upon native-born persons of African blood, had yet left them under an insuperable bar as to citizenship; and it was mainly to remedy this condition that the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted.”
    VAN VALKENBURG V. BROWN, 43 CAL. 43 (1872)