‘Citizen’ as Defined by Black’s Law Dictionary

Law Of Citizens as Defined In Black’s Law

Citizen. A member of a free, independent, and sovereign state, entitled to the enjoyment of all civil liberties, rights and immunities, and subject to the allegiance. It is used in opposition to alien, or foreigner, and embraces every person born of parents who are citizens of the United States, or who, being born in the United States, has a right to the protection of the United States, and all persons naturalized to be citizens under the laws of the United States. A citizen is a member of a political community, in which he enjoys the enjoyment of those civil and political rights with the performance of those civil duties which are incident to membership . In the United States system of government no person born into it (native-born citizens) can be expatriated, or lose his citizenship, without being either naturalized into another country program or express approval by the United States Congress via a constitutional amendment or a treaty (which must be approved by 2/3 of both houses of Congress). It differs from a national – and a person is always considered a national of a country regardless if it recognizes them or not. Countries also differ on how you become a citizen. A citizen of the United States is one who, having been born a citizen thereof, continues a citizen; or one who has become such by being naturalized. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct 456, 42 L.Ed 890 (1898).

Effects Of Citizenship

Consideration of "Citizen" in the Black’s Law Dictionary has sparked scholarly discourse on the legal rights and responsibilities imparted with citizenship. As set forth in precedent and discussed in scholarly literature, "citizen" has long been understood to mean a subject of a state. A citizen is a member of a recognized State, or a national of the United States, who has not lost his or her nationality by voluntarily relinquishing it or otherwise, as by renunciation, forfeiture, or deprivation. Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, at 264 (1990). However, the precise legal definition of citizen varies relative to constitutional provisions and statutory context. Prescriptive federal law lists the rights of a citizen. 8 U.S.C.A. 1401 states that a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, is a citizen of the United States at birth (discussing eligibility for citizenship); 8 U.S.C.A. 1451 states any person may "be a national and citizen of the United States … regardless if at birth he or she is a national and citizen … thereof under [that section]," if application is made when eighteen years of age (establishing eligibility for citizenship through birth parents); and NATIONALITY AND PASSPORT (Act of Oct. 14, 1940, c. 876, sec. 401.54, 54 Stat. 1137, R.S. sec. 1993, 1 U.S.C. sec. 1) under prescriptive federal citizenship and naturalization laws, states: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 598, 126 S.Ct. 2749, 163 L.Ed.2d 523 (2006) (reversal of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 415 F.3d 33 (D.C.Cir. 2005)). According to the Black’s Law dictionary, both an alien and a citizen can also be subject to "expatriation," (U.S. CONST. Art. VI) which is the legal process by which a person gives up their citizenship status. Oath of allegiance denounces any foreign allegiances to other nations including birth countries. While a person holds citizenship through birth, naturalization, or immigration, expatriation serializes the status, which may be revoked due to criminal activity, mental incapacity, or re-marriage. U.S. CONST. Art. VI ensures that 1) all treaties made constitute the supreme law of the land and 2) judges are bound thereby. Black’s Law Dictionary states that treaties are defined as "an agreement between two or more nations formally ratified to govern their mutual conduct." Treaty parties among nations may have different meanings, however. Pink v. Lessee of United States, 20 U.S. (7 Wheat.) 324, 15 U.S. (2 Wheat.) 224. To be valid, a treaty must be executed with strict adherence to prescribed constitutional method of formation. Worcester v. State of Georgia, 31 U.S. 515, 7 L. Ed. 918. U.S.C.A. Const. Art. II § 2. The prescriptive and proscriptive character of citizenship is subject to interpretation which by its terms can be classified as descriptive lexicons of common usage. The enduring obligation to the United States entailed by citizenship requires citizens to comply with laws, including participation on behalf of the United States should it enter into war. Under the U.S.C.A. Const. Art. II § 2, the President is effective Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy of said United States, while Congress alone has power to declare war, and other specific exclusions. It is well established law that any citizen is subject to prosecution for treason against the United States: levying war against them or in adherence to their enemies, and giving them aid and comfort. U.S.C.A. Const. Art. III § 3 and U.S.C.A. Const. Art. III § 3.

Variations In The Definition of Citizenship

When we look at the term "citizen," it is interesting to note that Black’s Law Dictionary definition for the term "citizen" does not reference the term "nationality." In context of international law, the term "citizenship" relates to that State of the individual, or where the individual is from as determined by their citizenship documents. The term "nationality" is of much more importance. Under modern law, "Nationality" is defined as being related to one of the principles of international law, such as jus sanguinis (blood relationship), jus soli (location of birth regardless of blood), or naturalization (marriage to a citizen providing legal residency and filed application, several years later results in a certificate of citizenship). The difference is slight, but nationality relates to an individual’s relationship with the civic identity, whereas citizenship relates to one’s relationship with the legal identity. In some countries, there may be individuals who are citizens of one nation, but nationals of another.
For example, an immigrant who is born in Canada to an American citizen is considered a "national" of the United States under the jus sanguinis principle, however if the child was born in Germany to a German citizen, although the child is a national of Germany, the child may also be considered a U.S. citizen by descent born abroad, though born into the German culture and may not speak English. Additionally, a child born in the United States to an immigrant who was naturalized, which could be a few months prior to or following the child’s birth, would not be a "national" of another culture nor does the individual have a foreign accent, but that individual is not considered "natural born," therefore is ineligible to run for the United States presidency unless he or she goes through naturalization. Thus, the definitions and description of these terms is much more significant than one might casually consider.
It is necessary to understand those nuances, because different laws in the United States, may apply differently depending on whether the individual is a citizen or a national. For instance, immigration laws on the books offer preferential visa and green card processing to individuals from "preferential countries." A non-citizen from another country may wish to marry a citizen from a country that is a preferential country, which could be a United States citizen from Nigeria, India or the Philippines because the laws in that country allow for much shorter waits for a K-1 visa (i.e. fiancé visa) or green card, easier procedures and generally lower costs. Citizenship must be resolved first with the correct type of visa application based on the lead time, unless the individual marrying the citizen is quite high net worth individual, they may be out of luck on the speed for the rest of the family. Because the laws are different for citizens and nationals of a country, because the law does not always apply the same depending on the nation or entity granting citizenship and naturalization, the term "citizen" has to be viewed in the context of the specific country and circumstance involved.
For instance, some countries require positive military service, while others have case-by-case exemptions. Some countries allow for dual citizenship and retention of it until the new citizenship is established, while others force the choice of … and a decision one way or another will be made by that government. Some countries require naturalization which involves a lengthy application process resulting in a certification, while other countries offer naturalization assistance and expedited processing. The language differences in the laws may very well mean a few months of additional waiting if you intend to apply for the "right type" of application.

Citizenship Within The Scope of International Law

Understanding the term "Citizen" in Black’s Law Dictionary is relatively straightforward in terms of international law and treaties. The majority of the time, terms from the Black’s Law Dictionary can be traced to some definition or interpretation in wider international law, treaties or customary practice.
The closest example of the term "citizen" in international law may be the Convention on Certain Questions Relating to Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters 1978, article 9 of which provides, States may not prosecute a person for an offence of which he has been acquitted or convicted, as defined by their law, on the sole ground that he is a national or citizen of the requesting State.
Many elements of this treaty follow wide expectations present in many countries’ legislation. These exceptions include rules around sovereign immunity, diplomatic assurances, defences of place and mandatory refusal to surrender, such as if the extradition would be a breach of an applicable law, would serve to prevent the state from carrying out an international obligation or would be contrary to public policy. By extension, article 14 prohibits states from surrendering a citizen contrary to any of the above grounds: A requested State shall not be bound to surrender the person if he is required to undergo prosecution or serve a sentence in its territory. In such a case, it shall adopt all measures necessary and available under its laws to prosecute the offence and carry out the sentence. Upon request, the requested State shall notify the requesting State of any measures taken.
The terms and meanings of any particular word in international law can change according to use and context, and the above is a perfect example . The Convention does not clearly define what a ‘citizen’ is, but article 14 broadly implies that state definition will not be taken into account if they are required to serve a term in the requesting state.
The question of whether the term would be interpreted to mean that a person born in a state is also a citizen of that state in accordance with its laws is even unclear under their domestic law, and even more so in terms of international law. The term ‘citizen’ is not only used more restrictively and vaguely than the term ‘national’, but does not enjoy the same protections under international law which a person may claim even if there is no expressed law outlining their rights. Some treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights afford special protections to ‘nationals’, including guarantees of non-refoulement and non-penalization for any illegal entry or stay in the requesting state, which are not extended to those merely labeled as a "citizen" by the requesting state.
The European Union operates a free movement regime and right of residence for EU citizens, allowing each state to establish their own residency requirements. While all EU citizens enjoy the essential community right to freely enter any state, individual states retain full control over how this is carried out in the face of public policy, public security or health concerns.
These caveats highlight the importance of the word ‘citizen’ as it is used in the international and diplomatic context. Their nuance should not be understated, and highlight a host of very different obligations which may apply to citizens or legal migrants, free from de facto protections enjoyed by deportees and illegals.

Historical Development of Citizenship

The etymology of citizenship is the French word citien, derived from the Latin word civitas (meaning a body of citizens who constitute a state with full power of self-government). The term may refer to both a body of citizens as well as a member of the community. The Latin root civis means a citizen. In Roman law, a citizen was defined as a member of a city that had equal rights with all other citizens. Limiting citizenship to individuals within a city-state speaks to the evolution of citizenship throughout history.
The expansion of citizenship to cover every person in a nation is evident by the allowance of women to vote, and to hold office, and the passage of amendments protecting individuals’ rights to life, liberty, and property. Since the ratification of the Constitution, various amendments were adopted preventing the government from restricting citizenship based on race, color, religious beliefs, etc.

Controversies In Citizenship

The legal definition of a citizen has not been without controversy. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines a citizen as any person "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." However, recent interpretations of what defines a citizen have come under scrutiny as debates over immigration intensify. "The legal debate surrounding citizenship is valid," argues Professor Joseph Landau of American University’s Washington College of Law, "in part because it implicates two competing interests at the core of American democracy: the desire for a more inclusive society and the need for an orderly approach to immigration."
Controversy over the term has also arisen in light of the Presidential power to define citizenship requirements. While the executive branch has the right to decide who qualifies as a citizen, legal experts including Aaron Morrissey, Staff Counsel for Keep Families Together, believe that Congress must play a larger role in these discussions. "Congress should explore what citizenship means in modern American society, taking into account those who’ve been excluded or delayed on their path to citizenship , " he says.
At the state-level, many have defended the term as it currently exists in Black’s Law Dictionary. "Black’s Law Dictionary is extremely helpful when it comes to understanding the meaning of an individual term," says law student and research assistant at the University of Richmond School of Law, Ann Kelly. However, debate continues to rage when it comes to the most appropriate way of defining citizenship.
"Both opinions have their merit," says Kelly, "but the strength of an opinion depends largely on the context in which the term is used. In certain contexts, a birth certificate can be the best evidence of one’s citizenship, while in other contexts such as inheritance or marital disputes, a blood tie could be more appropriate."
Experts agree that any debates concerning the legal meaning of citizen in Black’s Law Dictionary will have a significant impact on policy. "The list of policies reliant on our understanding of ‘citizen’ is vast," explains Professor Landau. "We could talk about voter registration, jury service, government benefits, tax policies, even criminal juries and asylum claims."