The "state" only exists as a delegation from the people. In the absence of popular consent, the state vanishes - starved of resources - or becomes overtly tyrannical. So the idea that the state can refer to citizens as "its", i.e., belonging to it, gets things precisely backwards. The state ought to do what the people want from it, insofar as a consensus can be determined. No more, no less.
The "state" only exists as a delegation from the people. In the absence of popular consent, the state vanishes - starved of resources - or becomes overtly tyrannical. So the idea that the state can refer to citizens as "its", i.e., belonging to it, gets things precisely backwards. The state ought to do what the people want from it, insofar as a consensus can be determined. No more, no less.