It is crucial to define the difference between “legal” and “lawful.” The generic Constitution references genuine law. The present civil authorities and their courts use the word “legal.” The following is from A Dictionary of Law (1893):
Lawful. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law.
Legal. Latin legalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the “practice” of law: as the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. “Legal” looks more to the ‘letter of the law’ [form]. And “lawful” to the spirit of the law. “Legal” is that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “Legal” process however defective.
Legal matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules. They are equitable in nature and are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express). A legal process can be defective in law. To be legal a matter does not have to follow the law.
Lawful matters are ethically enjoined in the law of the land – the law of the people – and are actual in nature, not implied. This is why whatever true law was upheld by the organic Constitution has no bearing or authority in the present day “Legal” courts. It is impossible for anyone in “authority” today to access, or take cognizance of, true law since “authority” is the “law of necessity.” 12 U.S.C. 95.
Therefore, it would appear that the meaning of the word “Legal” is the “color of law.”