PROOF OF FACT: Birth Occurred Outside the “United States” as Defined in Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, Clause 1

By ftsig-admin | April 15, 2026

The undersigned was born in the residuum of sovereignty of the California state. As a matter of fact, and pursuant to the 10th Amendment, this birth occurred within the exclusive Subject Matter Residuum of Sovereignty of said equal-footing State as established in Coyle v. Smith, 221 U.S. 559 (1911). Although the State and the Federal United States may occupy concurrent geography, they constitute separate and distinct Subject Matter Countries.

Because the birth occurred within the State’s exclusive Subject Matter of Country, it was outside the “United States” and its Subject Matter Jurisdiction as contemplated in Section 1, Clause 1 of the 14th Amendment. This factual position is established by the following chronological record:

  1. The Fact of Alienage: Buckner v. Finley, 27 U.S. 586 (1829), established as a matter of law that the “states are necessarily foreign to, and independent of each other.”
  2. The Removal of Disabilities:
    2.1. Paul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), established that the Privileges and Immunities Clause (sometimes also called the “Comity Clause”), Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1, was required specifically to “remove from the citizens of each State the disabilities of alienage in the other States.”
    2.2. There is NO equivalent Comity Clause between the states and the national government paralleling Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 so people born within the exclusive jurisdiction of Constitutional states remain legislatively foreign.
    2.3. This confirms that the citizens of each state are aliens and foreigners to every other, including the federal state, but only without federal general common-law.
  3. The Constitutional Silence: Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), confirmed that “the Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens,” leaving the Subject Matter of Country to the States.
  4. The Temporary Blend: This silence was temporarily bypassed in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), only by invoking a federal general common-law jus soli (derived from Swift v. Tyson, 41 U.S. 1 (1842)).
    4.1. This “blend” allowed the federal state to overlap its subject matter into State soil.
    4.2. Wong Kim Ark established that temporary allegiance constitutes alienage and that this temporary allegiance is that owed by nationals born within the exclusive jurisdiction of a constitutional state. This is the equivalent of Vattel’s alien. There can be no allegiance internally to the national government within the state. Only externally.
  5. The Final Severance: In Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), the Supreme Court overruled Swift v. Tyson and declared that “there is no federal general common law.” This act extinguished the blend, restoring the factual reality that the federal state and the equal-footing States are distinct, separate, and mutually alien Subject Matter Countries. The Neutrality Act in 1939 changed the meaning of alien within their own exclusive jurisdiction. 22 U.S.C. §456(f) establishes that only allegiance is required, but whether it is temporary or permanent is unspecified.
  6. The Fact of the Certificate: The undersigned possessed a Certificate of Live Birth issued and certified by a local County Registrar or Health Officer. As a matter of record, this document identifies the City and County of birth as the recording entities. It contains no factual claim that the birth occurred “in the United States” as written in Section 1, Clause 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. It contains no factual claim that the birth occurred within the federal “United States” defined in  26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9), nor does it certify the undersigned as a “citizen or resident of the United States” as defined in  26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30)(A).
  7. The Fact of Abode: Since the moment of birth, the undersigned has maintained a home and permanent address exclusively within the residuum of sovereignty of the State. This location serves as an abode in a real and substantial sense, as contemplated by 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701(b)-2(b).
  8. The Statutory Result: As a matter of physical fact, the undersigned maintains a “closer connection” to the sovereign State than to the federal “United States” defined in  26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(9). Therefore, there exists no factual basis at birth to classify the undersigned as a “citizen or resident of the United States” under  26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30)(A).
  9. The Resulting Fact: The birth of the undersigned is an event governed exclusively by state common-law jus soli. Following the severance in Erie, the federal state is foreign and alien to the undersigned’s _____________ birth. There exists no authorized “Subject Matter of Country” called the “United States” that applies to the natural-born in an equal-footing State, leaving no operation of law to classify the undersigned as a statutory “United States person” under  26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30).
  10. Passport Law: Establishes in 22 U.S.C. §212 requires only allegiance but not temporary or permanent. Thus, it can incorporate a citizen born within the exclusive jurisdiction of a state in the Constitution who owes temporary allegiance like an alien does in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).

I declare the foregoing factual statements under penalty of perjury:


Signed:Date:
Posted in Proof of Facts