Think for yourself
Since the colonial period, colonies and states had passed laws that discriminated against free Blacks. In the South, these were generally included in "slave codes"; the goal was to suppress the influence of free blacks (particularly after slave rebellions) because of their potential influence on slaves. Restrictions included prohibiting them from voting (North Carolina had allowed this before 1831), bearing arms, gathering in groups for worship, and learning to read and write. The purpose of these laws was to preserve slavery in slave societies.
Many of the laws codified in the Christian Black Slave Codes are in existence today. I will be going over 2 of them.
They are: (1) BLACKS SHALL NEVER OWN PROPERTY and (2) BLACKS CAN NOT BEAR ARMS WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THEIR MASTERS.
To regulate relations between slaves and colonists, the Louisiana Code noir,
or slave code, based largely on that compiled in 1685 for the French Caribbean
colonies, was introduced in 1724 and remained in force until the United States
took possession of Louisiana in 1803. The Code’s 54 articles regulated the
status of slaves and free blacks, as well as relations between masters and
slaves. The entire body of laws appears below. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/louisianas-code-noir-1724/
XII. We forbid slaves to carry offensive weapons or heavy sticks, under the
penalty of being whipped, and of having said weapons confiscated for the
benefit of the person seizing the same. An exception is made in favor of those
slaves who are sent a hunting or a shooting by their masters, and who carry
with them a written permission to that effect, or are designated by some known
mark or badge. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/louisianas-code-noir-1724/
XXII. We declare that slaves can have no right to any kind of property, and
that all that they acquire, either by their own industry or by the liberality
of others, or by any other means or title whatever, shall be the full property
of their masters ; and the children of said slaves, their fathers and mothers,
their kindred or other relations, either free or slaves, shall have no
pretensions or claims thereto, either through testamentary dispositions or
donations inter vi-vos ; which dispositions and donations we declare null and
void, and also whatever promises they may have made, or whatever obligations
they may have subscribed to, as having been entered into by persons incapable
of disposing of any thing, and of participating to any contract. https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/louisianas-code-noir-1724/
These laws are still in force today with slightly different words used. As opposed to openly stating Blacks need permission from their masters to bear arms. The States have enacted statutes stating that everyone needs a license to bear arms and is more prone to granting ‘whites’ a license to carry as opposed to Blacks. Who are often made felons for having them without licenses.
According to all legal dictionaries, the word license literally means “Permission.” So, the slave law is still enforced, just subtly.
LICENSE. Certificate or the document itself which gives permission. Aldrich v. City of Syracuse, 236 N.Y.S. 614, 617, 134 Misc. 698. Permission or authority. Independent School Dist., Class A, No. 1, Cassia County v. Pfost, 51 Idaho 240, 4 P.2d 893, 897; Monsour v. City of Shreveport, 194 La. 625, 194 So. 569, 571; Platt v. Bender, La.App., 178 ,So. 678, 682. Permission by some competent authority to do some act which, without such permission, would be illegal. State ex rel. Zugravu v. O'Brien, 130 Ohio St. 23, 196 N.E. 664; Solberg v. Davenport, 211 Iowa, 612, 232 N.W. 477, 480; Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. State Board of Equalization, 110 Mont. 5, 99 P.2d 229, 234.
Permission to do something which Without the license would not be allowable. City of Shreveport v. Brister, 194 La. 615, 194 So. 566, 567. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. City of Lexington, 256 Ky. 595, 76 S.W.2d 894, 896. Privilege from state or sovereign. M. Itzkowitz & Sons v. Geraghty, 247 N.Y.S. 703, 704, 139 Misc. 163; Alabama Power Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 315, 128 F.2d 280, 289. Revocable certificate of convenience and necessity. Ex parte Lockhart, 350 Mo. 1220, 171 S.W.2d 660, 666. To "license" means to confer right or power which does not exist with• out it. Inter-City Coach Lines v. Harrison, 172 Ga. 390 157 S.E. 673, 676; S. S. Kresge Co. v. City of Bluefield, 117 W.Va. 17, 183 S.E. 601, 602.
On the other hand. As opposed to outright saying Blacks cannot own property. Mortgages exist. According to all legal dictionaries, a mortgage does not create title to estate. Meaning, a mortgage is not ownership of property. Neither is a deed. The word deed literally just means actions. So, what gets filed in the Recorder of Deeds is notice that an action has taken place on a particular parcel of land.
Mortgages like licenses of course to hide the unconstitutionality of these slave laws, apply to all. But, as seen below, since those in power know that there is no money and mortgages are linear contracts that are void for lack of law consideration. They are able to discharge and trade property for $1.00.
MORTGAGE. An estate created by a conveyance absolute in its form, but intended to secure the performance of some act, such as the payment of money, and the like, by the grantor or some other person, and to become void if the act is performed agreeably to the terms prescribed at the time of making such conveyance. 1 Washb.Real Prop. *475.
But in many states in modern times, it is regarded as a mere lien, and not as creating a title or estate. Zeigler v. Sawyer, Tex.Civ.App., 16 S.W.2d 894, 896. It is a pledge or security of particular property for the payment of a debt or the performance of some other obligation, whatever form the transaction may take, but is not now regarded as a conveyance in effect, though it may be cast in the form of a conveyance. Muth v. Goddard, 28 Mont. 237, 72 P. 621, 98 Am.St.Rep. 553; Johnson v. Robinson, 68 Tex. 399, 4 S.W. 625; Killebrew v. Hines, 104 N.C. 182, 10 S.E. 159, 17 Am.St.Rep. 672; Stockel v. Elich, 297 P. 595, 597, 112 Cal.App. 588; In re Morgan, D.C.N.J., 39 F.2d 489, 490.
Governor Gina Raimondos Release of Mortgage.
Here is some information she may have used to accomplish this:
MONEY. In usual and ordinary acceptation, it means gold, silver, or paper money used as circulating medium of exchange, and does not embrace notes, bonds, evidences of debt, or other personal or real estate. Lane v. Railey, 280 Ky. 319, 133 S.W.2d 74, 79, 81.
CONSIDERATION. Consideration is not to be confounded with motive. Consideration means something which is of value in the eye of the law, moving from the plaintiff, either of benefit to the plaintiff or of detriment to the defendant. Patteson, J., in Langd. Sel. Cas. Contr. 168; s. c. 2 Q.B. 851; Miller v. Bank of Holly Springs, 131 Miss. 55, 95 So. 129, 130, 31 A.L.R. 698. "Nothing is consideration that is not regarded as such by both parties." Schlecht v. Schlecht, 168 Minn. 168, 209 N.W. 883, 887. And "price" and "consideration," though sometimes the same, are not always identical. Oregon Home Builders v. Crowley, 87 Or. 517, 170 P. 718, 721. Illegal Consideration. An act which if done, or a promise which if enforced, would be prejudicial to the public interest. Harriman, Cont. 101.
LEGAL CONSIDERATION. One recognized or permitted by the law as valid and lawful; as distinguished from such as are illegal or immoral. The term is also sometimes used as equivalent to "good" or "sufficient" consideration. See Sampson v. Swift, 11 Vt. 315; Albert Lea College v. Brown, 88 Minn. 524, 93 N.W. 672, 60 L.R.A. 870.
PAY, V. To discharge a debt; to deliver to a creditor the value of a debt, either in money or in goods, for his acceptance. Beals v. Home Ins. Co., 36 N.Y. 522. Carpenter v. Dummit, 221 Ky. 67, 297 S.W. 695, 700; Vollmer v. Automobile Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn., 207 App.Div. 67, 202 N.Y.S. 374, 375.
Trust Law 101
In ‘Divine law’, ‘Trust law’ & the laws that govern ‘Wills’ and ‘Heritability’, when any individual or group of individuals are not in the Honor of their Mothers and Fathers they then have no right to inheritance, and thus are non-descendible. For example; If I am William P Baker (Grantor), and in my ‘Will’, I leave all my assets, etcetera to my Son Paul B Baker (Beneficiary), if my son Paul is mentally incompetent (unable to inherit), then those assets will be placed in a trust, to be administered by his mother (Trustee) or any other person designated as a trustee, until he either becomes of age (if he is a minor) or becomes mentally competent to manage the assets, which he can either remain a beneficiary or assume the position of trustee and administer the trust for the benefit of his prosperity. If Paul does not recognize his connection (Blood line) to me, his father, and a trust is not established designating a trustee to administer it, then the course of descent is thereby interrupted and all assets revert to ‘the State’ whereas the principles of escheating get invoked whereby the estate becomes abandoned for a lack of an heir competent enough to inherit or make claim thereto. By not recognizing his blood connection and his inheritance, Paul has abandoned his estate. But, if Paul has a child and that child recognizes his connection to me, the grandfather, and can prove that connection as well as prove mental competence, then the inheritance must be returned to him via ‘Reversion’. CHEATERS, or ESCHEATORS, “a cheater came to signify a fraudulent person, and thence the verb to cheat was derived. Wharton.” “In feudal law. Escheat Is an obstruction of the course of descent, and consequent determination of the tenure, by some unforeseen contingency, in which case the land naturally results back, by a kind of reversion, to the original grantor, or lord of the fee.” “In American law. Escheat signifies a reversion of property to the state in consequence of a want of any individual competent to inherit. The state is deemed to occupy the place and hold the rights of the feudal lord.” "Escheat at feudal law was the right of the lord of a fee to re-enter upon the same when it became vacant by the extinction of the blood of the tenant. The word 'escheat,' in this country, at the present time, merely indicates the preferable right of the state to an estate left vacant, and without there being any one in existence able to make claim thereto." Escheating is what all Mortgages are rooted in. Before we get into Escheating, I need to mention that whenever anyone agrees to enter into a Mortgage, the ‘Borrower’ is always listed as a ‘Tenant’ and never the ‘Owner’. CONVERSION. Equity. The exchange of property from real to personal or from personal to real, which takes place under some circumstances in the consideration of the law, such as, to give effect to directions in a will or settlement, or to stipulations in a contract, although no such change has actually taken place: and by which exchange the property so dealt with becomes invested with the properties and attributes of that into which it is supposed to have been converted; Although it is sometimes necessary for certain purposes of devolution and transfer to regard the property in its changed condition as though the change has not absolutely taken place;
Trust Law 102
If you’ve been following along with my lectures and purchasing my literature, you already know that a Mortgage does not mean you are the owner of a home. The only way to own property is via an Allodial Title: dealing with the right of ‘Reversion’, ‘Adverse Possession’, the creation of a ‘Family (tribal) Trust’, the education of your Heirs and the people around you to form a Jural Society to protect your assets and estate (Social Security / Nationhood).
During this lecture we will be going over the following:
i What is a ‘Security’?
ii What is a ‘Bond’?
iii What is ‘Insurance’?
iv What is ‘Assurance’?
v What is ‘Liability’?
vi What is ‘Limited Liability’?
vii How to Securitize your Estate & Assets
viii How to create your own Allodial Home Owners Insurance
ix What a true Creditor is
As a preliminary, it is important to, yet again, go over the fact that Federal Reserve Notes are not money. The only international, lawful, allodial, and constitutional money is Gold Coin or its Silver equivalent (or any precious metals).
Once the American nationals and other American citizens alike fully grasp the gnosis that FRN’s are Private Commercial Paper printed by the Corporate United States Treasury Department, a De Facto Government agency, for the Private Federal Reserve Bank to take complete control of the market like we see today. We will be in a better position with the knowledge that we can do the same within our Moorish nation. (most if not all business on North American Soil, registered with the United States or individual Corporate States agree to only accept FRN’s, which creates a monopoly over the market, trade and industry. Which is a direct violation of Article 1 section 8 and Section 10 of the Constitution- no obligations shall be placed on contracts and only gold and silver may be used to pay off a debt, Article 17 of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1787 and Article 20 of the United Nations Declaration on Human rights). As stated by the Patriot and Prophet of the Moorish nation: We Moors must maintain a grand treasurer, just as in the days of our forefathers; then you are a nationuntil then, you are nothing. - THINK THIS OVER, YOU MOORS by: El Hajj Sharif Abdul Ali
Trust Law 103 - Probate Court
How to download your product immediately after purchase
The reason we must establish a living trust expressing our will, is to avoid Probate Court.
Probate court deals with the validation of wills, but again, it is a ploy and enforcement of article 22 of the Christian Black Codes of 1724, whereby they divide our estate and tax the heirs out of their inheritance. There is no reason for them to act as a 3rd party to our affairs (Masters authority over their Slaves). Once we establish a trust and our will is expressed then it is ‘written’. Meaning, it is the law and the last order given to the heirs by the trustee or grantor for the next successor viz there is nothing to verify or validate.
Probate court, sometimes called a surrogate court, is a court that has jurisdiction via the birth certificate, 14th Amendment, and the people’s belief in their color of law contracts and transmitting utilities, as well as the people’s ignorance and status, to deal with matters of probate and the administration of estates; with reference to escheat. In some jurisdictions, such courts may be referred to as Orphans' Courts, or courts of ordinary. In some jurisdictions probate court functions are performed by a chancery court or another court of equity, or as a part or division of another court. All of which are guised as assisting people with the validation of wills etc. and often times result in the rightful heirs apparent being taxed out of their property by the European administers because we don’t know law; nor do we assert our right of claim to our land.
Probate courts chicanery (the use of trickery to achieve a political, financial, or legal purpose) administer the distribution of the assets of a decedent (one who has died), adjudicates the validity of wills, enforces the provisions of a valid will (by issuing the grant of probate), prevents malfeasance by executors and administrators of estates, and provides for the equitable distribution of the assets of persons who die intestate (without a valid will), such as by granting a grant of administration giving judicial approval to the personal representative to administer matters of the estate. A surrogate is a substitute, especially a person deputizing for another in a specific role or office when said person is incapable of disposing of anything or participating in any contracts i.e. mentally incompetent.
Article 22 We declare that slaves have no right to any kind of property but that all that they acquire either by their own industry, or by the ability of others, or by any other means or title whatever shall be the full property of their masters; and the children of said slaves, their fathers, mothers, their kindred or other relation either free or slave shall have no pretensions or claim thereto, either through testamentary nor positions or donations inter vivace; which dispositions and donations we declare null and void, and also whatever promise they may have interred into by persons incapable of disposing of anything and or participating to any contract.
The Birth Certificate / Berth Certificate, is, a creation of a thing and that thing is given the ALL CAPITAL LETTERS NAME a STRAW-MAN / Artificial Person, being a homonym, that looks and sounds like our name, but is not. Considering another human cannot transact business in another man’s name and be honorable, the all capital letter name, as an example, JOHN DOE, is distinguished from John Doe. European family names, otherwise known at law as “Christian names,” have been placed on us to keep us in dishonor and to convert all the wealth we generate within that name, over to their family trust.
The root word of ‘Birth’ is from PIE *bhrto past participle of root *bher- (1) "to carry; Old English beran "to carry, bring; bring forth, give birth to, produce; to endure without resistance; to support, hold up, sustain; to wear". In reference to maritime law: It is in reference to vessels or ships docking, anchoring or mooring to a port for rest, maintenance, on and offload etc. When the ship or vessel docks, it is given a certificate of berthing, logging in the date, time, arrival, parentage (from whence it came) and the name of the ship, as well as the Capitan or principal agent of the ship. This information is gathered in order to later (bond) collect a docking fee (debt) from the ships Capitan (debtor) and its crew for the compensation of being allowed to dock their ship at the owner or Bey’s port (creditor). This same rule is applied to the attaching of a debt (bond / Berth Certificate to an infant when the Spirits-Vessel (Physical body) is passing though the mother’s water and enters the hands (port) of the Dock-tor. The baby’s anchor is its placenta, attached to its nav-el (navigating (like a ship) El (God)). That placenta is then dropped in the Dock-tors ‘ports’, this, an alleged debt is owed by said baby. Thus, that child would never be able to buy anything, nor sell anything unless they have the name attached to that Berth Certificate or the number associated with that name called a Social-Security-Number: - King James Bible Book of Rev.12:
Estate Law & The Feudal System (Mortgage Fraud) Trust Law 104
18 U.S. Code § 2331. Definitions. 10
Alldoial Title and the Constitution. 12
Mortgage Writ of Discovery. 13
United States Supreme Court 19
CRAIG v. STATE OF MISSOURI (1830) 19
Argued: Decided: January 1, 1830. 19
United States Supreme Court 22
DON E. WILLIAMS CO. v. COMMISSIONER (1977) 22
Argued: December 8, 1976Decided: February 22, 1977. 22
First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly. 23
First National Bank of Montgomery, Plaintiff vs Jerome Daly, Defendant 24
16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256. 26
This booklet will be put into the most colloquial way possible for easy comprehension. This booklet will be written etymologically-sound to the best of my ability and the words used will be true to their definitive definition.
1. A Mortgage, as defined in Henry Campbell Black’s Law dictionary is merely a lien and does not create title to an estate. Easily put, if you get a mortgage, this does not mean you own the home. The same stands true to the deed of trust, this also does not mean you own the estate. The word deed simply means action and a trust is an abstract noun, being an idea, is placed on paper, as the mortgage and promissory note, which is to remain private, is supposed to be reflected in the “Deed of Trust” to ensure private information is not revealed to the public. Of course, just because things should be a certain way, doesn’t mean people will do it the correct way. These reigns true in the fact that you and others, have the right to contract. So, if you wish to do it “incorrectly” or pursuant to feudal law, you are well within your right. Just as if you were contracting pursuant to common-law or constitutional law you would be well within your right: i.e. slavery is a choice. As stated in the Holy Books – “To you your way and to me mine.”
Christian Black Codes of 1724 - Article 22: We declare that slaves have no right to any kind of property but that all that they acquire either by their own industry, or by the ability of others, or by any other means or title whatever shall be the full property of their masters; and the children of said slaves, their fathers, mothers, their kindred or other relation either free or slave shall have no pretensions or claim thereto, either through testamentary nor positions or donations inter vivace; which dispositions and donations we declare null and void, and also whatever promise they may have interred into by persons incapable of disposing of anything and or participating to any contract.
MORTGAGE. An estate created by a conveyance absolute in its form, but intended to secure the performance of some act, such as the payment of money, and the like, by the grantor or some other person, and to become void if the act is performed agreeably to the terms prescribed at the time of making such conveyance. 1 Washb.Real Prop. *475. A conditional conveyance of land. Mitchell v. Burnham, 44 Me. 299. A transfer of property passing conditionally as security for debt. Potter v. Vernon, 129 Okl. 251, 264 P. 611, 613. A debt by specialty, secured by a pledge of lands, of which the legal ownership is vested in the creditor, but of which, in equity, the debtor and those claiming under him remain the actual owners, until debarred by judicial sentence or their own laches, Coote, Mortg. 1. The foregoing definitions are applicable to the common-law conception of a mortgage. But in many states in modern times, it is regarded as a mere lien, and not as creating a title or estate. Zeigler v. Sawyer, Tex.Civ.App., 16 S.W.2d 894, 896. It is a pledge or security of particular property for the payment of a debt or the performance of some other obligation, whatever form the transaction may take, but is not now regarded as a conveyance in effect, though it may be cast in the form of a conveyance. Muth v. Goddard, 28 Mont. 237, 72 P. 621, 98 Am.St.Rep. 553; Johnson v. Robinson, 68 Tex. 399, 4 S.W. 625; Killebrew v. Hines, 104 N.C. 182, 10 S.E. 159, 17 Am.St.Rep. 672; Stockel v. Elich, 297 P. 595, 597, 112 Cal.App. 588; In re Morgan, D.C.N.J., 39 F.2d 489, 490. Chattel mortgage. A mortgage of goods, chattels, or personal property
2. A promissory note is exactly what it sounds like. It’s a promise, written down, thus, in the form of a note, like when you pass notes in high-school. This is where the 4-corner rule comes into play. As opposed to filing a claim in court based on a verbal promise, which, without video or audio evidence would be difficulty to prove. It becomes easier for everyone to just write things down. This written expression of thought is also where we get the phrase “expressed trust.” It is just that simple.
3. 4 Corner Rule, simply means, any civil litigation based on contracts will not be based on what litigants say about the contractual agreement, as far as terms and conditions. But solely and strictly based on the written agreement (law) of the contract itself, this is based in equity. Of course, with other pre-imposed conditions. Such as full-disclosure, honor, mental status, equal valuable exchange and consent, et alia.
4. The word mortgage, etymologically, means dead pledge.
5. The mortgage is merely a lien on the house. Which the mortgage contract / promissory note, states that, if the amount allegedly loaned is not paid in full, based on a default, then the house is taken as collateral. Thus, the home is the collateral interest in the mortgage contract.
6. All mortgages are liner-contracts.
7. The alleged loaning agency (creditor) never loaned you anything of actual value, which makes the entire deed (action) void ab initio. But, since credit is an abstract noun (not physical), and you agreed that they are the creditor and not the lender, they contractually don’t have to give you anything. Since you do not challenge this via an adverse claim and agree via your ignorant (tacit) compliance (acquiescence) and trust that these people are going to be honest with you simply because they have a suit and a smile on their face. You become their Chattel by consent, agreement, and your own ignorant free-will.
Ignorant – Late 14th century., “lacking wisdom or knowledge; unaware.” From Old French (14th Century) ignorant, from Latin ignorantem (nominative /pertaining to - ignorans) “not knowing,” “not to know, to be unacquainted, mistake, misunderstood; take no notice of, pay no attention to.”
Mortgage Fraud - how to stop a foreclosure: Bey v. Oldfield
For educational purposes only. Thise is what I did, accepting all the risks of my own decision. this is not legal advice. Our home that we lived in since 1999, is still in my parents' possession (2023).
Watch this testomonial with my parents discussing how we fought for our estate together. - https://www.youtube.com/live/42VstRaemOQ?feature=share
Mortgage Fraud Video (Educational Purposes Only)
NATIONALITY. That quality or character which arises from the fact of a person's belonging to a nation or state. Nationality determines the political status of the individual, especially with reference to allegiance; while domicile determines his civil status..
CIVILITER MORTUUS. Civilly dead; dead in the view of the law. The condition of one who has lost his civil rights and capacities, and is accounted dead in law. Rasor v. Rasor, 173 S.C. 365, 175 S.E. 545.
MORTUUS. Lat. Dead. So in sheriff's return. mortuus est, he is dead.
MORTUUS CIVILITER. Civil death. This incident attended every attainder of treason or other felony, whereby in the language of Lord Coke the attainted person "is disabled to bring any action, for he is extra legem mortuus"; Co.Litt. 199. He could be heard in court only for the direct purpose of reversing the attainder, and not in prosecution of a civil right; 1 B. & A. 159. He could be grantor or grantee after attainder, and the grant would be good against all persons except the king; Shepard, Touch. 231.
Nationality is a legal identification of a person in international law, establishing the person as a subject or a national, of a sovereign state. It affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state against other states.
Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "Everyone has the right to a nationality", and "No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality". By international custom and conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are. Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
The rights and duties of nationals vary from state to state, and are often complemented by citizenship law, in some contexts to the point where citizenship is synonymous with nationality. The noun "national" can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state.
Conceptually, citizenship is focused on the internal political life of the state and nationality is a matter of international law. Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to nationality. As such nationality in international law can be called and understood as citizenship, or more generally as subject or belonging to a sovereign state, and not as ethnicity. This notwithstanding, around 10 million people are stateless.
In the contemporary era, the concept of full citizenship encompasses not only active political rights, but full civil rights and social rights. Nationality is a necessary but not sufficient condition to exercise full political rights within a state or other polity. Nationality is required for full citizenship.
Statelessness is the condition in which an individual has no formal or protective relationship with any state. There are various reasons why a person can become stateless. This might occur, for example, if a person's parents are nationals of separate countries, and the mother's country rejects all offspring of mothers married to foreign fathers, but the father's country rejects all offspring born to foreign mothers. Although this person may have an emotional national identity, he or she may not legally be the national of any state.
Another stateless situation arises when a person holds a travel document (passport) which recognizes the bearer as having the nationality of a "state" which is not internationally recognized, has no entry into the International Organization for Standardization's country list, is not a member of the United Nations, etc.
De jure vs de facto statelessness
Nationality law defines citizenship and statelessness. Citizenship is awarded based on two well-known principles: jus sanguinis and jus soli. Jus sanguinis translated from Latin means "right of blood". According to this principle, citizenship is awarded if the parent(s) of the person are citizens of that country. Jus soli is referred to as "birthright citizenship". It means, anyone born in the territory of the country is awarded citizenship of that country.
Statelessness is defined by the 1954 Statelessness Convention as "a person who is not considered a national by any State under operation of its law.” A person can become stateless because of administrative reasons. For example, "A person may be at risk of statelessness if she is born in a State that applies jus sanguinis while her parents were born in a State that applies jus soli, leaving the person ineligible for citizenship in both States due to conflicting laws." Moreover, there are countries in which if a person does not reside for a specified period of time, they can automatically lose their nationality. To protect those individuals from being deemed "stateless", 1961 Statelessness Convention places limitations on nationality laws. See 1961 Statelessness Convention, arts. 6–8.
The 14th Amendment to the united States constitution - Declared unconstitutional at the height of the Civil Rights movement
Colonial assemblies denounced the law, claiming the tax was illegal on the grounds that they had no representation in Parliament.