The Civics Guide

Three times in the last sixteen months, the country has answered a single question in the streets.1 In June 2025, millions turned out on the same day the president staged a military parade for his own birthday. In October 2025, they returned for a second day of action across more than 2,600 locations. On March 28, 2026, they came back a third time, in what organizers described to the press as the largest single-day demonstration in American history, with events in all fifty states and every congressional district.12 I have written about each of these days on this site, because the question they answer matters more than the crowds: does the United States have a king? ...

The Supreme Court was designed to be the least dangerous branch. Alexander Hamilton called it that in Federalist 78, and for most of American history the description held: the Court had no army, no purse, and no way to enforce its own decrees. Its only real power was the willingness of the country to obey it. That willingness is now in question, and the numbers are not subtle. In July 2026, Gallup measured Supreme Court job approval at 33 percent, the lowest in the 26-year history of the trend, with disapproval at a record 61 percent (Jones, 2026). The Marquette Law School Poll, which tracks the Court continuously, found 47 percent approval and 53 percent disapproval in late July, below 50 percent for the ninth consecutive survey (Franklin, 2026). The same poll found that 58 percent of Americans now believe the justices are motivated mainly by politics rather than law, up six points in a single quarter (Franklin, 2026). A majority, 54 percent, say the Court is going out of its way to avoid ruling against President Trump (Franklin, 2026). ...

Public corruption is conventionally discussed in moral terms: integrity, trust, the character of public life. Those concerns are real, and an earlier essay, Corruption at the Summit, addressed them on constitutional grounds. Corruption is, however, also an economic event, with a price, a transmission mechanism, and a payer. The payer is neither the official who accepts the favor nor the magnate who purchases it. The payer is everyone else. The argument of this essay is that public corruption functions as a tax that no legislature ever enacted: it misallocates capital, raises the cost of borrowing, diminishes the revenue the state can collect, and erodes the voluntary trust on which every modern economy depends. None of these effects requires an assumption that anyone has committed a crime. Much of the corruption that matters most is perfectly legal, and that is precisely what makes it expensive. ...

Sixty-one days from now, on November 3, Americans will vote in a midterm election: all 435 seats of the House of Representatives, 35 seats of the Senate, and thousands of state and local offices. Most of us will vote without ever asking a question the Constitution answers in surprising and incomplete ways: what does the document actually say about federal elections? The answer is less than most people assume, and more. The original Constitution never mentions a right to vote for president, and barely mentions elections at all. What it does contain is a carefully engineered division of power over election machinery, a method for choosing a president that has been amended four times, and a counting procedure whose ambiguities were tested on January 6, 2021 and rewritten by statute a year later. This article walks through the text, clause by clause, because sixty-one days before a midterm is a good time to know exactly what is written down and what is not. ...

Corruption at the highest levels of government is not merely a matter of bribery, scandal, or personal disgrace. It is a constitutional danger. When public office becomes a means of private enrichment, partisan revenge, selective enforcement, or protection for the powerful, the damage reaches far beyond the official who abuses power. It teaches citizens that law is negotiable, truth is ornamental, and public service is only another marketplace for influence. ...

While the bulk of the “No Kings” protests unfolded across the United States, the movement found resonance in international communities as well — signaling that opposition to perceived authoritarianism and executive over-reach in Washington has an overseas echo. 🌍 Global Participation The protest coalition behind No Kings, led in the U.S. by Indivisible and the 50501 Movement, also mobilized international chapters and diaspora groups under alternate banners such as “No Tyrants” or “No Dictators” when the word “Kings” ran the risk of confusing anti-monarchic protest abroad. (Wikipedia) ...