Look up the federal statute for ‘treason’. There you will find CLEARLY that the statute for the crime of treason is set apart from all others of a similar category by “persons owing allegiance”.
Owing allegiance is only on record by an oath of allegiance.
Naturalized US Citizens are required to take an Oath of Allegiance.
All other US Citizens are not required to take an oath unless they enter military or certain government service paths.
A US Citizen, born as a US Citizen, in other words not naturalized, is NOT REQUIRED BY LAW to take an oath of allegiance, not required to ‘owe’ allegiance UNLESS such person enters government service such as the military, the executive agencies, Congress, the courts. Such a person so entering is required to ‘owe allegiance’ and this can only be marked for the record by taking an oath of allegiance.
In this context, an ‘oath’ is a legal event.
US Citizens born as citizens, if they act out in a ‘treasonous’ manner, may be charged with ‘sedition’, ‘subversion’, ‘conspiracy’ but NOT treason unless they are on record as ‘owing allegiance’. Among these crimes, treason is the highest and can be punished by death.
We can say that we observe a person acting in a ‘treasonous manner’. But to charge them with the crime of treason requires more elements. There is a difference between ‘treasonous behavior’ and ‘treasonous crime’.
We might observe a US-born citizen who we think is nuts acting bizarrely, say jumping up and down saying they want to overthrow the Constitution and the United States in favor of World Communism. We can say that such person is acting in a treasonous manner. Unfortunately, there is no law that bars them from acting that way if there is no record of them owing allegiance.
If we assert that such as person ‘owes allegiance’, that person or their lawyer might respond by asking “where and when did I ever owe allegiance”?
If they took an oath of allegiance, we got them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawakita_v._United_States
... The Court's majority held that the jury in Kawakita's trial had been justified in concluding that he had not lost or given up his U.S. citizenship while he was in Japan during the war.[9]:720–732 The Court added that an American citizen owed allegiance to the United States, and could be found guilty of treason, no matter where he lived—even for actions committed in another country that also claimed him as a citizen.[3][9]:732–736 Further, given the flagrant nature of Kawakita's actions, the majority found that the trial judge had not acted arbitrarily in imposing a death sentence.[9]:744–745
................ http://uniset.ca/other/cs5/190F2d506.html
TOMOYA KAWAKITA v. UNITED STATES
No. 12061
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT 190 F.2d 506; 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2453
June 22, 1951
PRIOR HISTORY: See 96 F. Supp. 824 (S.D. Cal. 1950)
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Affirmed, 343 U.S. 717 (1952); the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Presidential proclamation on Oct. 29, 1953; Kawakita was pardoned on Oct. 24, 1963 under condition of perpetual exile, having lost his American nationality by reason of conviction for treason.
II. Did Kawakita Owe Allegiance to The United States?
The definition of treason is a part of the supreme law of the land. United States Constitution, Article III, Sec. 3, provides: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. * * * ”
Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 1, Act of March 4, 1909, c. 321, Sec. 1, 35 Stat. 1088, as it stood at the time of the alleged overt acts, provided: n6 “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason.”
By definition, the crime of treason can only be committed by one owing allegiance to the United States. It is appellant’s contention that at the time the acts charged in the [**9] indictment were committed, he did not owe allegiance to the United States because, as a dual American and Japanese citizen, he owed allegiance to Japan alone while in that country. According to appellant’s reasoning, in his brief, under his dual citizenship he could adhere to the enemy and give it aid and comfort while in the enemy country with impunity.As we shall presently show, dual citizenship does nothing to relieve an American citizen of his citizenship obligations. An American citizen retains that status until expatriated under American law and he is subject to trial and punishment for treason. It is also contended that, having been a Japanese national from birth, Kawakita’s act of registration in the family census register, and his other activities during the war, amounted to expatriation from United States citizenship.
Expatriation is the voluntary renunciation or abandonment of nationality and allegiance. Perkins v. Elg, 1939, 307 U.S. 325, 59 S.Ct. 884, 83 L.Ed. 1320. In order to be relieved of the duties of allegiance, consent of the sovereign is required. Mackenzie v. Hare, 1915, 239 U.S. 299, 36 S.Ct. 106, 60 L.Ed. 297. [**10] Congress has provided that the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all [*512] people, n7 and has further made a legislative declaration as to what acts shall amount to an exercise of such right. n8 The enumerated methods set out in the chapter are expressly [*513] made the sole means of expatriation. n9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawakita_v._United_States
... The Court's majority held that the jury in Kawakita's trial had been justified in concluding that he had not lost or given up his U.S. citizenship while he was in Japan during the war.[9]:720–732 The Court added that an American citizen owed allegiance to the United States, and could be found guilty of treason, no matter where he lived—even for actions committed in another country that also claimed him as a citizen.[3][9]:732–736 Further, given the flagrant nature of Kawakita's actions, the majority found that the trial judge had not acted arbitrarily in imposing a death sentence.[9]:744–745
................ http://uniset.ca/other/cs5/190F2d506.html
TOMOYA KAWAKITA v. UNITED STATES
No. 12061
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, NINTH CIRCUIT 190 F.2d 506; 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2453
June 22, 1951
PRIOR HISTORY: See 96 F. Supp. 824 (S.D. Cal. 1950)
SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Affirmed, 343 U.S. 717 (1952); the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Presidential proclamation on Oct. 29, 1953; Kawakita was pardoned on Oct. 24, 1963 under condition of perpetual exile, having lost his American nationality by reason of conviction for treason.
II. Did Kawakita Owe Allegiance to The United States?
The definition of treason is a part of the supreme law of the land. United States Constitution, Article III, Sec. 3, provides: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. * * * ”
Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 1, Act of March 4, 1909, c. 321, Sec. 1, 35 Stat. 1088, as it stood at the time of the alleged overt acts, provided: n6 “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason.”
By definition, the crime of treason can only be committed by one owing allegiance to the United States. It is appellant’s contention that at the time the acts charged in the [**9] indictment were committed, he did not owe allegiance to the United States because, as a dual American and Japanese citizen, he owed allegiance to Japan alone while in that country. According to appellant’s reasoning, in his brief, under his dual citizenship he could adhere to the enemy and give it aid and comfort while in the enemy country with impunity.As we shall presently show, dual citizenship does nothing to relieve an American citizen of his citizenship obligations. An American citizen retains that status until expatriated under American law and he is subject to trial and punishment for treason. It is also contended that, having been a Japanese national from birth, Kawakita’s act of registration in the family census register, and his other activities during the war, amounted to expatriation from United States citizenship.
Expatriation is the voluntary renunciation or abandonment of nationality and allegiance. Perkins v. Elg, 1939, 307 U.S. 325, 59 S.Ct. 884, 83 L.Ed. 1320. In order to be relieved of the duties of allegiance, consent of the sovereign is required. Mackenzie v. Hare, 1915, 239 U.S. 299, 36 S.Ct. 106, 60 L.Ed. 297. [**10] Congress has provided that the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all [*512] people, n7 and has further made a legislative declaration as to what acts shall amount to an exercise of such right. n8 The enumerated methods set out in the chapter are expressly [*513] made the sole means of expatriation. n9