CitizenofaStateunderArticleIV,Section2,Clause1 oftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica canbealitigantinfederalcourt

2011DanGoodman TheFourteenthAmendmentwasadoptedonJuly28,1868.[Footnote1] TheFourteenthAmendmentcreatedcitizenshipoftheUnitedStates.[Footnote2] If,one,beingacitizenoftheUnitedStates,wantedtobecomeacitizenofaState, underSection1,Clause1oftheFourteenthAmendment,thenallonehadtodowas resideinaState.Inthiscase,onewouldbeacitizenoftheUnitedStatesANDa citizenofaState.[Footnote3]Heorshe,wouldthenhaveprivilegesand immunitiesofacitizenoftheUnitedStatesplusprivilegesandimmunitiesofa citizenofaState.[Footnote4] TheFourteenthAmendmentaccordingtotheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates, intheSlaughterhouseCases,changedcitizenshipundertheConstitution.Citizenship ofaStatewasnowtobeconsideredasseparateanddistinctfromcitizenshipofthe UnitedStates.AcitizenofaStatewastobeconsideredasseparateanddistinctfrom acitizenoftheUnitedStates: OftheprivilegesandimmunitiesofthecitizenoftheUnitedStates,andof theprivilegesandimmunitiesofthecitizenoftheState,andwhattheyrespective are,wewillpresentlyconsider;butwewishtostateherethatitisonlytheformer whichareplacedbythisclause(Section1,Clause2oftheFourteenthAmendment) undertheprotectionoftheFederalConstitution,andthatthelatter,whateverthey maybe,arenotintendedtohaveanyadditionalprotectionbythisparagraphofthe amendment.SlaughterhouseCases:83U.S.(16Wall.)36,at74(1873).
http://books.google.com/books?id=DkgFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false

Inaddition: IntheSlaughterhousecases,16Wall.36,thesubjectoftheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates,asdistinguishedfromthoseofa particularState,wastreatedbyMr.JusticeMillerindeliveringtheopinionofthe court.Hestated...thatitwasonlyprivilegesandimmunitiesofthecitizenof 1

theUnitedStatesthatwereplacedbythe[Fourteenth]amendmentunderthe protectionoftheFederalConstitution,andthattheprivilegesandimmunitiesof acitizenofaState,whatevertheymightbe,werenotintendedtohaveany additionalprotectionbytheparagraphinquestion,buttheymustrestfortheir securityandprotectionwheretheyhaveheretoforerested.Maxwellv.Dow:176 U.S.581,at587(1900).

http://books.google.com/books?id=8toGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA587#v=onepage&q&f=false

And: ...Itis,then,totheFourteenthAmendmentthattheadvocatesofthe congressionalactmustresorttofindauthorityforitsenactment,andtothefirst sectionofthatamendment,whichisasfollows:Allpersonsbornornaturalizedin theUnitedStates,andsubjecttothejurisdictionthereof,arecitizensoftheUnited States,andoftheStatewhereintheyreside.NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylaw whichshallabridgetheprivilegesorimmunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates,nor shallanyStatedepriveanypersonoflife,liberty,orproperty,withoutdueprocess oflaw,nordenytoanypersonwithinitsjurisdictiontheequalprotectionofthe laws. Inthefirstclauseofthissection,declaringwhoarecitizensoftheUnitedStates, thereisnothingwhichtouchesthesubjectunderconsideration.Thesecondclause, declaringthatnoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichwillabridgethe privilegesorimmunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates,islimited,accordingto thedecisionofthiscourtinSlaughterHouseCases,tosuchprivilegesand immunitiesasbelongtocitizensoftheUnitedStates,asdistinguishedfrom thoseofcitizensoftheState.Nealv.StateofDelaware:103U.S.370,at406 (1880).
http://books.google.com/books?id=Y7wGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA406#v=onepage&q&f=false

SonowthereisacitizenofaStateandthereisacitizenoftheUnitedStates: ...Thereisnoinherentrightinacitizentothussellintoxicatingliquorsby retail.ItisnotaprivilegeofacitizenoftheStateorofacitizenoftheUnited States.Crowleyv.Christensen:137U.S.86,at91(1890).

http://books.google.com/books?id=htIGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=false

...IntheConstitutionandlawsoftheUnitedStates,thewordcitizenis generally,ifnotalways,usedinapoliticalsensetodesignateonewhohasthe 2

rightsandprivilegesofacitizenofaStateoroftheUnitedStates.Baldwinv. Franks:120U.S.678,at690(1887).[Footnote5]
http://books.google.com/books?id=c04GAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA690#v=onepage&q&f=false

AcitizenoftheUnitedStatesislocatedatSection1oftheFourteenth Amendment.AcitizenofaStateistobefoundatArticleIV,Section2,Clause1ofthe ConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica: ...Thereisnoinherentrightinacitizentothussellintoxicatingliquorsby retail.ItisnotaprivilegeofacitizenoftheStateorofacitizenoftheUnited States.Crowleyv.Christensen:137U.S.86,at91(1890).

http://books.google.com/books?id=htIGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=false

Anotherobjectiontotheactisthatitisinviolationofsection2,art.4,ofthe constitutionoftheUnitedStates,andofthefourteenthamendment,inthatthisact discriminatesbothastopersonsandproducts.Section2,art.4,declaresthatthe citizensofeachstateshallbeentitledtoalltheprivilegesandimmunitiesofthe citizensoftheseveralstates;andthefourteenthamendmentdeclaresthatnostate shallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesandimmunitiesof citizensoftheUnitedStates.Butwehaveseenthatthesupremecourt,inCrowleyv. Christensen,137U.S.91,11Sup.Ct.Rep.15,hasdeclaredthatthereisnoinherent rightinacitizentosellintoxicatingliquorsbyretail.Itisnotaprivilegeofacitizen ofastateorofacitizenoftheUnitedStates.Cantiniv.Tillman:54Fed.Rep.969, at973(1893).
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ehg4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA973#v=onepage&q&f=false

Theconstitutionalprovisiontherealludedtodidnotcreatethoserights,which itcalledprivilegesandimmunitiesofcitizensoftheStates.Itthrewaroundthemin thatclause(ArticleIV,Section2,Clause1)nosecurityforthecitizenoftheStatein whichtheywereclaimedorexercised.Nordiditprofesstocontrolthepowerofthe Stategovernmentsovertherightsofitsowncitizens. ItssolepurposewastodeclaretotheseveralStates,thatwhateverthoserights, asyougrantorestablishthemtoyourowncitizens,orasyoulimitorqualify,or imposerestrictionsontheirexercise,thesame,neithermorenorless,shallbethe measureoftherightsofcitizensofotherStateswithinyourjurisdiction. SlaugherhouseCases:83U.S.(16Wall.)36,at77(1873).[Footnote6]
http://books.google.com/books?id=DkgFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA77#v=onepage&q&f=false

AcitizenoftheUnitedStatesistoidentifiedhiscitizenshipinafederalcourtbyaverring thatheorsheisacitizenoftheUnitedStatesANDacitizenofaStateoftheUnion: ThecourtsoftheUnitedStateshavenotjurisdictionincasesbetweencitizens oftheUnitedStates,unlesstherecordexpresslystatesthemtobecitizensof differentstates.Woodv.Wagon:6U.S.(2Cranch)1(1804).

http://books.google.com/books?id=qzkFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA9#v=onepage&q&f=false

AcitizenofaStateistoaverthatheorsheisacitizenofaStateoftheUnion: ThebillfiledintheCircuitCourtbytheplaintiff,McQuesten,allegedhertobe acitizenoftheUnitedStatesandoftheStateofMassachusetts,andresidingat TurnerFallsinsaidState,whilethedefendantsSteiglederandwifewerealleged tobecitizensoftheStateofWashington,andresidingatthecityofSeattleinsaid State.StatementoftheCase,Steigleiderv.McQuesten:198U.S.141(1905). TheavermentinthebillthatthepartieswerecitizensofdifferentStates wassufficienttomakeaprimafaciecaseofjurisdictionsofarasitdependedon citizenship.Opinion,Steigleiderv.McQuesten:198U.S.141,at142(1905). [Footnote6]
http://books.google.com/books?id=ceIGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q&f=false

Therefore,acitizenofaState,sincetheadoptionoftheFourteenthAmendment,canbea litigantinfederalcourt. AcitizenofaState,sincetheadoptionoftheFourteenthAmendment,canpursuea causeofactionagainstanothercitizenofadifferentState: TheappellantsbroughtsuitintheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheSouthern DistrictofNewYorkforthepurposeofrecoveringfromtheTrusteeaninterestina trustestatewhichhadbeensold,transferredandassignedbyConradMorrisBraker, thebeneficiary.ThecomplainantswerecitizensandresidentsofPennsylvania. BothdefendantswerecitizensandresidentsofNewYork.Notwithstandingthe diversityofcitizenship,thecourtdismissedthebillonthegroundthat,asthe assignorBraker,acitizenofNewYork,couldnotintheUnitedStatesDistrictCourt, havesuedFletcher,TrusteeandcitizenofthesameState,neithercouldthe Complainants,hisassignees,suetherein,eventhoughtheywereresidentsofthe StateofPennsylvania. Theappealfromthatdecisioninvolvesaconstructionof24oftheJudicialCode, 4

whichlimitsthejurisdictionoftheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtwhensuitisbrought therein...torecoveruponanypromissorynoteorotherchoseinactioninfavor ofanyassignee.....Brownv.Flectcher:235U.S.589,at594thru595(1914).

http://books.google.com/books?id=44GAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA594#v=onepage&q&f=false

AcitizenofaState,sincetheadoptionoftheFourteenthAmendment,canbe pursuedinacauseofactionagainstacitizenofaforeignState: BytheConstitution,thejudicialpoweroftheUnitedStatesextendsto controversiesbetweencitizensofaState,andforeignStates,citizensorsubjects. Andbystatute,CircuitCourtsoftheUnitedStateshaveoriginalcognizanceofall suitsofacivilnature,atcommonlaworinequity,inwhichthereisacontroversy betweencitizensofaStateandforeignStates,citizens,orsubjects.25Stat.433,c. 866..... AscomplainantswerecitizensofaforeignStateanddefendantwasacitizen ofNebraska,asaffirmativelyappearedfromthepleadings,noissueoffact arisinginthatregard,theCircuitCourthadjurisdiction.Hennessyv. RichardsonDrugCompany:189U.S.25,at34(1903).
http://books.google.com/books?id=KWoUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA34#v=onepage&q&f=false

Thus,acitizenofaState,underArticleIV,Section2,Clause1oftheConstitutioncanbea litigantinfederalcourt. ____________ Footnotes: 1.TheFourteenthAmendmentwhichwasfinallyadoptedJuly28,1868.Holden v.Hardy:169U.S.375,at382(1918).

http://books.google.com/books?id=4sGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA382#v=onepage&q=&f=false

2.NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates.Section1,Clause2oftheFourteenth Amendment,ConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_1127.html

3.AcitizenoftheUnitedStatescanbecomealsoacitizenofaState,underSection 1,Clause1oftheFourteenthAmendment.Assuch,onewouldbeacitizenofthe UnitedStatesANDacitizenofaState: Thequestionispresentedinthiscase,whether,sincetheadoptionofthe fourteenthamendment,awoman,whoisacitizenoftheUnitedStatesANDtheState ofMissouri,isavoterinthatState,notwithstandingtheprovisionoftheconstitution andlawsoftheState,whichconfinetherightofsuffragetomenalone.... Thereisnodoubtthatwomenmaybecitizens.Theyarepersons,andbythe fourteenthamendmentallpersonsbornornaturalizedintheUnitedStatesand subjecttothejurisdictionthereofareexpresslydeclaredtobecitizensofthe UnitedStatesandoftheStatewhereintheyreside.Minorv.Happersett:88U.S. (21Wall.)162,at165(1874).
http://books.google.com/books?id=IEsGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA165#v=onepage&q&f=false

TheFourteenthAmendmentdeclaresthatcitizensoftheUnitedStatesare citizensofthestatewithintheyreside;thereforetheplaintiffwasatthetimeof makingherapplication,acitizenoftheUnitedStatesANDacitizenoftheStateof Illinois. Wedonotheremeantosaythattheremaynotbeatemporaryresidenceinone State,withintenttoreturntoanother,whichwillnotcreatecitizenshipinthe former.Buttheplaintiffstatesnothingtotakehercaseoutofthedefinitionof citizenshipofaStateasdefinedbythefirstsectionofthefourteenthamendment. Bradwellv.StateofIllinois:83U.S.130,at138(1873).

http://books.google.com/books?id=DkgFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA138#v=onepage&q=&f=false

4.PrivilegesandimmunitiesofacitizenofaStateareintheconstitutionandlaws ofaparticularState: ...Whatevermaybethescopeofsection2ofarticleIVandweneednot,in thiscaseenteruponaconsiderationofthegeneralquestiontheConstitutionof theUnitedStatesdoesnotmaketheprivilegesandimmunitiesenjoyedbythe 6

citizensofoneStateundertheconstitutionandlawsofthatState,themeasureofthe privilegesandimmunitiestobeenjoyed,asofright,byacitizenofanotherState underitsconstitutionandlaws.McKanev.Durston:153U.S.684,at687(1894).

http://books.google.com/books?id=mmkUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA687#v=onepage&q=&f=false

5.WecometothecontentionthatthecitizenshipofEdwardswasnotaverredin thecomplaintorshownbytherecord,andhencejurisdictiondidnotappear. Inansweringthequestion,whethertheCircuitCourthadjurisdictionofthe controversy,wemustputourselvesintheplaceoftheCircuitCourtofAppeals,and decidethequestionwithreferencetothetranscriptofrecordinthatcourt. HadthetranscriptshownnothingmoreastothestatusofEdwardsthanthe avermentofthecomplaintthathewasaresidentoftheStateofDelaware,assuch anavermentwouldnotnecessarilyhaveimportedthatEdwardswasacitizenof Delaware,anegativeanswerwouldhavebeenimpelledbypriordecisions.Mexican CentralRy.Co.v.Duthie,189U.S.76;Hornev.GeorgeH.HammondCo.,155U.S.393; Dennyv.Pironi,141U.S.121;Robertsonv.Cease,97U.S.646.Thewholerecord, however,maybelookedto,forthepurposeofcuringadefectiveavermentof citizenship,wherejurisdictioninaFederalcourtisassertedtodependupon diversityofcitizenship,andiftherequisitecitizenship,isanywhereexpressly averredintherecord,orfactsarethereinstatedwhichinlegalintendment constitutesuchallegation,thatissufficient.Hornev.GeorgeH.HammondCo.,supra andcasescited. Asthisisanactionatlaw,weareboundtoassumethatthetestimonyofthe plaintiffcontainedinthecertificateoftheCircuitCourtofAppeals,andrecitedto havebeengivenonthetrial,waspreservedinabillofexceptions,whichformed partofthetranscriptofrecordfiledintheCircuitCourtofAppeals.Beingapartof therecord,andpropertoberesortedtoinsettlingaquestionofthecharacterof thatnowunderconsideration,Robertsonv.Cease,97U.S.648,wecometoascertain whatisestablishedbytheuncontradictedevidencereferredto. Inthefirstplace,itshowsthatEdwards,priortohisemploymentontheNewYork SunandtheNewHavenPalladium,waslegallydomiciledintheStateofDelaware. Next,itdemonstratesthathehadnointentiontoabandonsuchdomicil,forhe testifiedunderoathasfollows:OneofthereasonsIlefttheNewHavenPalladium was,itwastoofarawayfromhome.IlivedinDelaware,andIhadtogobackand forth.MyfamilyareoverinDelaware.Now,itiselementarythat,toeffectachange ofoneslegaldomicil,twothingsareindispensable:First,residenceinanew domicil,and,second,theintentiontoremainthere.Thechangecannotbemade, 7

exceptfactoetanimo.Botharealikenecessary.Eitherwithouttheotheris insufficient.Mereabsencefromafixedhome,howeverlongcontinued,cannotwork thechange.Mitchellv.UnitedStates,21Wall.350. AsDelawaremust,then,beheldtohavebeenthelegaldomicilofEdwardsatthe timehecommencedthisaction,haditappearedthathewasacitizenofthe UnitedStates,itwouldhaveresulted,byoperationoftheFourteenth Amendment,thatEdwardswasalsoacitizenoftheStateofDelaware.Anderson v.Watt,138U.S.694.Bethisasitmay,however,Delawarebeingthelegaldomicilof Edwards,itwasimpossibleforhimtohavebeenacitizenofanotherState,District, orTerritory,andhemustthenhavebeeneitheracitizenofDelawareoracitizen orsubjectofaforeignState.Ineitherofthesecontingencies,theCircuitCourt wouldhavehadjurisdictionoverthecontroversy.But,inthelightofthetestimony, wearesatisfiedthattheavermentinthecomplaint,thatEdwardswasaresidentof theStateofDelaware,wasintendedtomean,and,reasonablyconstrued,mustbe interpretedasaverring,thattheplaintiffwasacitizenoftheStateofDelaware. Jonesv.Andrews,10Wall.327,331;ExpressCompanyv.Kountze,8Wall.342.Sun Printing&PublishingAssociationv.Edwards:194U.S.377,at381thru383(1904).
http://books.google.com/books?id=tekGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA381#v=onepage&q&f=false

Also: TheactwasconsideredinJohnsonv.UnitedStates,160U.S.546,andwethere heldthatapersonwhowasnotacitizenoftheUnitedStatesatthetimeofan allegedappropriationofhispropertybyatribeofIndianswasnotentitledto maintainanactionintheCourtofClaimsundertheactinquestion.Therewasnot inthatcase,however,anyassertionthattheclaimantwasacitizenofaStateas distinguishedfromacitizenoftheUnitedStates....[U]ndoubtedlyinapurely technicalandabstractsensecitizenshipofoneoftheStatesmaynotinclude citizenshipoftheUnitedStates...Unquestionably,inthegeneralandcommon acceptation,acitizenoftheStateisconsideredassynonymouswithcitizenofthe UnitedStates,andtheoneisthereforetreatedasexpressiveoftheother.This flowsfromthefactthattheoneisnormallyandusuallytheother,andwhere suchisnotthecase,itispurelyexceptionalanduncommon.UnitedStatesv. NorthwesternExpress,Stage&TransportationCompany:164U.S.686,688(1897).
http://books.google.com/books?id=xOQGAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA688#v=onepage&q=&f=false

6.Thereisalsothefollowing: TwoclausesoftheUnitedStatesConstitutionareinvoked:2ofart.4,which declaresthatThecitizensofeachStateshallbeentitledtoallprivilegesand 8

immunitiesofcitizensintheseveralStates,andpartof1ofthe14thAmendment: NoStateshallmakeorenforceanylawwhichshallabridgetheprivilegesor immunitiesofcitizensoftheUnitedStates;norshallanyStatedepriveanypersonof life,libertyorproperty,withoutdueprocessoflaw,nordenytoanypersonwithin itsjurisdictiontheequalprotectionofthelaws. AcomparisonofthestatuteunderreviewwiththeothergamelawsoftheState showsthat,withregardtohuntinggame,greaterrestrictionsareplaceduponnon residentsthanuponresidents,andthatthepenaltiesincurredbytheformerfor violatingtherestrictionsimposedaresevererthanthoseincurredbythelatter. Thediscriminationsofthestatutearenotbaseduponthefactofcitizenship,nor doesitappearbytherecordbeforeusthattheprosecutorwasacitizeneitherofa sisterStateoroftheUnitedStates.Consequently,2ofarticle4andsomuchof the14thAmendmentassecurestheprivilegesandimmunitiesofthecitizenofthe Nationarenotapplicabletothecaseinhand.Allenv.Wyckoff:2Cent213(1886).
http://books.google.com/books?id=sRpLAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA213#v=onepage&q&f=false

2.AsappliedtoacitizenofanotherState,ortoacitizenoftheUnitedStates residinginanotherState,astatelawforbiddingsaleofconvictmadegoodsdoes notviolatetheprivilegesandimmunitiesclause[s]ofArt.IV,2andthe[privileges orimmunitiesclauseofthe]FourteenthAmendmentoftheFederalConstitution,ifit appliesalsoandequallytothecitizensoftheStatethatenactedit.P.437.Syllabus, Whitfieldv.StateofOhio:297U.S.431(1936). 1.Thecourtbelowproceededupontheassumptionthatpetitionerwasa citizenoftheUnitedStates;andhisstatusinthatregardisnotquestioned.The effectoftheprivileges[and]orimmunitiesclauseoftheFourteenthAmendment,as appliedtothefactsofthepresentcase,istodenythepowerofOhiotoimpose restraintsuponcitizensoftheUnitedStatesresidentinAlabamainrespectofthe dispositionofgoodswithinOhio,iflikerestraintsarenotimposeduponcitizens residentinOhio.TheeffectofthesimilarclausefoundintheFourthArticleofthe Constitution,asappliedtothesefacts,wouldbethesame,sincethatclauseis directedagainstdiscriminationbyastateinfavorofitsowncitizensandagainst thecitizensofotherstates.SlaughterHouseCases,16Wall.36,1Woods21,28; Bradwellv.State,16Wall.130,138.Opinion,Whitfieldv.StateofOhio:297U.S. 431,at437(1936).
http://supreme.justia.com/us/297/431/(Syllabus) http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13866319457277062642(Opinion)