14th Amendment, 14th Amendment citizen, affidavit, book review, citizenship, civil rights act, Constitution, feudal serfdom, Feudalism, Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, From Sovereign to Serf, Glenn Ambort, government, John Benson, political rights, Roger S. Sayles, Roger Sayles, Roger Sayles Affidavit, Roger Sayles Argentina, Roger Sayles' Book, second-class citizen, serf, Serfs UP, Slaughter-House Cases, slaves, Sovereign, sovereignty, state citizens, U.S. National, United States, United States Constitution
FROM SOVEREIGN TO SERF – Government by the Treachery and Deception of Words
The thesis of the book, “From Sovereign to Serf – Government by the Treachery and Deception of Words,” by Roger S. Sayles, (Online download available at E-Junkie.com or grab a FREE preview here) is that the original intent of the Founders of this Nation was to join the separate States together by a national government of limited and enumerated powers, the People of the several States remaining sovereign in all other matters not specifically delegated to the national government.
The Citizens of the several States were deemed to be Citizens of the United States via their citizenship in one of the States.
This state of affairs remained constant until after the War between the States, aka, the Civil War, or, in Roger Sayles’ Southern vernacular, the War of Northern Aggression, left those of the African-American race without any protection from the state or federal governments, because the U.S. Supreme Court, in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1856), had held that individuals of that race were not, and could not be, citizens of the United States under the U.S. Constitution.
To remedy this unfortunate situation, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866, granting citizenship to the recently freed African-American slaves. To ensure that act of citizenship was not overturned by any succeeding Congress, the Republican-led Congress proposed the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, wherein the first sentence read:
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.
The Slaughter-House Cases
The first case wherein the Supreme Court addressed the meaning of that Amendment was the Slaughter House Cases (1873).
In the Slaughter House Cases, a number of butchers had complained that the State of Louisiana had violated their federal “privileges and immunities” by passing an ordinance that placed restrictions on the slaughtering of animals in New Orleans. The slaughter houses sought the protection of the federal government against the violation of their right to practice their livelihood as they had previously. The Supreme Court held that, while the Constitution certainly protected individuals against violation of the “privileges and immunities” protected by the Constitution, it did not protect the slaughter houses against violations of the “privileges and immunities” incident to their state citizenship.
In its ruling, the Court, speaking through Justice Gray, stated:
It is quite clear then, that there is a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of a state, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual. . . .
Wong Kim Ark v. United States
Perhaps Chief Justice Fuller best explained the citizenship rule that now prevails with the federal government, in his dissent 25 years later, in Wong Kim Ark v. United States (1898), wherein he stated:
The rule was the outcome of the connection in feudalism between the individual and the soil on which he lived, and the allegiance due was that of liegemen to their liege lord.
Roger maintains, with powerful authorities cited in support, that the federal government, previously limited to the specific, enumerated powers set forth in the original Constitution, was now free, under the 14th Amendment, to pass whatever laws and regulations it deemed fit for the governance of its new citizen-serfs. However, not content with the reach of its new powers to come out from under the restrictions and limitations of the original Constitution, through the treachery and deception of words, the federal government has now seen fit to call all Americans citizen-serfs under the 14th Amendment and recognizes as citizen-sovereigns under the original Constitution only those who assert their sovereignty under the passport application as a U.S. National.
Here is an illustration from the book where Roger makes his point:
Consider this: in England, there are only two classes of persons – subjects and a sovereign; England has no citizens, as we use that term in the United States. Now, Queen Elizabeth is certainly not a subject; she is the sovereign. Is she also a ‘national’ of the nation of England?
At dictionary.com, we find the definition of ‘national,’ when used as a noun: “a citizen or subject of a particular nation who is entitled to its protection.” Do you think that the Queen is entitled to the protection of England? The answer is obvious. Do you think she is a subject of England? Hardly! Quite obviously, she is entitled to England’s protection, she is not a subject, and, because England has no citizens as we use that term, she must be the sovereign-national of England.
Just as the Queen is the sovereign-national of England, so also, free Americans are the sovereign-nationals of the United States.
Just as the Queen is the sovereign-national of England, so also, free Americans are the sovereign-nationals of the United States. See Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419, 471-72 (1793) (“at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called) and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.”)
Roger first became aware of the duplicity, treachery and deception of words used by the federal government in a class on taxes he attended in 1992, taught by John Benson and Glenn Ambort, both of whom have spent a combined 14 years in federal prison solely for teaching their understanding of the history of our tax laws and sovereignty. Roger maintains that they are among today’s many “political prisoners.”
Based upon what he learned in that class, he filed an “affidavit” of his understanding of his sovereign citizenship in the county records of his home state of Florida. (He has since emigrated to Argentina.)
Roger has used that affidavit on six different occasions, including to obtain a Florida picture ID, his social security retirement benefits and an official U.S. Passport (on three separate occasions,) all while claiming what he believes to be his rightful, sovereign status as a U.S. National.
Not once has Roger Sayles’ affidavit of citizenship been questioned, refused or rebutted.
The purpose of his book is to inform readers what steps he took, the reasoning behind those steps and a path that others may follow, if they wish to follow in his footsteps.
- US vs USA (adask.wordpress.com)
- Nancy Pelosi: 11th, 14th Amendment, “Whatever It Is, I’m With the Constitution” (freedomoutpost.com)
- 14th Amendment citizenship (adask.wordpress.com)
- Are We Headed For A 14th Amendment Fight? (underpaidgenius.com)