We went from subjects to citizens. As cited in WKA, “The sovereignty has been transferred from one man to the collective body of the people, and he who before as a ’subject of the king’ is now ‘a citizen of the State.”
So...what is your point?
And yet you cannot separate the two meanings when it is an inconvenience to your defense of the traitor in chief and cite English Common law as our own........too obvious troll....can't have it both ways....unless you're Mr Rogers, troll at large.
Why do you defend a man who is systematically destroying your Country, Military man?
Talk about a hypocrite, who's the one ignoring his own quotes now? what happened to that 1st part of the cite from WKA that you boasted of:
“the change of phrase has entirely resulted from the change of government.”
Those words have meaning:
“The term “citizen,” (natural/original common law) as understood in our law, is precisely analogous (Similar in function but not in structure(meaning) and evolutionary origin) (jus commune/natural/original common law v. jura corona, or lex prerogativa/feudal/statutory law) to the term “subject” (jura corona, or lex prerogativa/feudal/statutory law) in the common law, and the change of phrase has entirely resulted from the change of government.”
The change of government meant brought about a change in meaning. Analogous, although similar in function brought an entirely new meaning to the phrase. The feudal doctrine was ushered out & natural law under the laws of nations was ushered in by the change of phrase. Contemporary dictionaries claim that a computer brain is analogous to a human brain so shal we make citizens of all comperters now too? That is the kind of ignorance you show as well as progressives who think plants & animals have a right to sue us in a court of law.
Just how much alcohol have you had to drink today? It's affecting you already feeble mind and it isn't a pretty sight.