It must be remembered that there are two types of citizenship in America - state citizenship and federal citizenship - and that the rights and privileges of one are not the same as the other. Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36; 21 L.Ed. 394 (1873); Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927); Jones v. Temmer, 829 F.Supp. 1226 (1993). Moreover, very few realize that state citizenship is separate, distinct, and independent of federal citizenship. Crosse v. Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A.2d 431 (1966).
The U.S. Supreme Court examined the issue of whether the United States of America was "one nation" and made the following conclusion regarding our political arrangement: "By that law the several States and Governments spread over our globe, are considered as forming a society, not a NATION." Chisholm, Ex'r. v. Georgia, 2 Dall. 419; 1 L.Ed. 440 (1794).
One who is a citizen of one of the states of the union may also qualify as a "nonresident alien" with respect to the United States government provided that the person has not entered into some privileged capacity with respect to the federal government.
In a case dealing with banking, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that state citizenship is the fundamental citizenship in America and "the right to carry out an incident to a trade, business or calling such as the deposit of money in banks is not a privilege of national citizenship.". Madden v. Kentucky. 309 U.S. 83; 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940). That same high court has also equated state citizenship with national citizenship (M'Ilvaine v. Coxe's Lessee, 8 U.S. 279 (1804)) and recognized that the right to naturalize citizens is not an exclusive power of the federal government, but that the states, individually, have a concurrent right with the federal government to naturalize citizens. (Collet v. Collet, 2 U.S. 294; 1 L.Ed. 387 (1792)). Since citizenship is controlled by the individual and not the government (see Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253; 87 S.Ct. 1660 (1967)), one may be a citizen of any one of the states of the union and not a citizen of the federal government. McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883). Additionally, the state has authority to determine the status of persons within its boundaries. Doc. Lonas v. State, 59 Tenn. 287 (1871). And finally, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that, "A person may cease to be a citizen of one country, without becoming a citizen of any other." Caignet v. Pettit, 2 U.S. 234; 2 Dall. 234; 1 L.Ed. 362 (1795).
It necessarily follows that one may terminate one's citizenship with the federal government without becoming a citizen elsewhere. The United States government is without authority to take action against such a one who maintains citizenship with one of the states of the union.
Remember that the states of the union are sovereign (Articles of Confederation--1778, Article I; see California Government Code, § 110). Moreover, there can be only one sovereign over a particular area of land (see Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. Chambers, 73 Ohio St. 16; 76 N.E. 91; 11 LR.A., N.S., 1012(1905)).
An American national can maintain the benefits of constitutional state Citizenship by properly characterizing him or herself as a statutory "alien" in matters regarding nationality AND domicile. Thus, a state Citizen is a statutory "alien" under Federal law and has the right to acquire payments tax free within the private-sector.
The implementing regulations of the tax code inform the "taxpayer" how to correct their status with the IRS. 26 CFR §301.6109-1(g)(1)(i) states the following:
(g) Special rules for taxpayer identifying numbers issued to foreign persons
(1) General rule--(i) Social security number.
A social security number is generally identified in the records and database of the Internal Revenue Service as a number belonging to a U.S. citizen or resident alien individual. A person may establish a different status for the number by providing proof of foreign status with the Internal Revenue Service under such procedures as the Internal Revenue Service shall prescribe, including the use of a form as the Internal Revenue Service may specify. Upon accepting an individual as a nonresident alien individual, the Internal Revenue Service will assign this status to the individual's social security number.
However, before a "taxpayer" can obtain this remedy with the IRS, the "taxpayer" must first correct his status with the SSA. 20 CFR §422.110(a) states the following:
Sec. 422.110 Individual's request for change in record.
(a) Form SS-5. If you wish to change the name or other personal identifying information you previously submitted in connection with an application for a social security number card, you must complete and sign a Form SS-5 except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section. You must prove your identity, and you may be required to provide other evidence. (See Sec. 422.107 for evidence requirements.) You may obtain a Form SS- 5 from any local Social Security office or from one of the sources noted in Sec. 422.103(b). You may submit a completed request for change in records to any Social Security office, or, if you are outside the U.S., to the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office, Manila, Philippines, or to any U.S. Foreign Service post or U.S. military post. If your request is for a change of name on the card (i.e., verified legal changes to the first name and/or surname), we may issue you a replacement card bearing the same number and the new name. We will grant an exception from the limitations specified in Sec. 422.103(e)(2) for replacement social security number cards representing a change in name or, if you are an alien, a change to a restrictive legend shown on the card. (See Sec. 422.103(e)(3) for the definition of a change to a restrictive legend.)
It is important to note that the legal status of "non-resident alien" is a complex and nuanced issue that is determined by a variety of factors, including immigration laws and regulations, tax laws, and international treaties. The argument that non-resident alien status should be granted to certain individuals or groups is a matter of ongoing debate and legal interpretation.
Based on the arguments and precedents present in the American political and legal history, the judges and bureaucrats cannot rule the argument for a non-resident alien made by an American, as a frivolous argument.
A struggle is required by the citizens of the states of the union who make the argument for being a non-resident alien. To win this argument, many Americans need to become aware of the legal basis for this term and how it takes root. It's important to keep in mind that the legal system is not infallible and there will always be room for improvement and this improvement can only be brought through a collective and organized movement.
Social and legal change can often be brought about through collective action and organizing. This can take the form of grassroots movements, advocacy groups, and legal challenges. A collective effort can help raise awareness, build support, and put pressure on decision-makers to change laws and policies. It's important to note that this kind of change can take time and persistence, as well as a thorough understanding of the legal and political landscape.