The constitution is the framework for how our government should work. It’s our operating manual. Yet we are enabling, and in some cases, applauding our elected officials for circumventing it.
In light of this, I recently decided to read the constitution. I haven’t done that since my high school civics class. To be honest I don’t actually recall ever reading the entire constitution until now. In fact, I don’t even remember if I even took a civics class in high school, or anytime over the course of my education. Admittedly, high school was a long time ago for me and electrical engineering and marketing degrees do not require this as a core competency to graduate.
I tried hard to recall if my gen-Z offspring were required to take a civics class, as that data should be much closer to the front of my hippocampus, but I only remember them agonizing over the AP U.S. History exam (or APUSH). Although US history is related to civics it does not require focus on the principles, practices, and processes of government and citizenship. Thankfully my kids’ APUSH curriculum did require some familiarity with the constitution. Anyway, I decided to do some research and find out if civics was even a requirement in US schools.
Here’s what I learned:
The 1960s was the last time the US required civics to be taught across all US schools. So, there you have it. Unless you are over 80 years old chances are good you never had to take civics at all. You were likely never required to be tested on the framework of how our government works. The 1960s was also the same timeframe as the Vietnam war, Watergate and the erosion of trust in our government.
So, are there any requirements today regarding civics education? Yes, but it depends on the state you live in, and the content is not standardized. The states can teach whatever they want with respect to how our U.S. government is run and the rights they chose to highlight.
Below is a chart that breaks down the requirements by state.
Ten states have no high school civics course requirement at all. California, where my children grew up is one of those states. Interestingly the state I went to high school in, Idaho, does require a full year of civics, and you must pass a test to graduate, but only since the 2016-17 school year. Since I graduated high school in the 80’s there is a good chance I did not take a civics class at all. Hopefully this is why I cannot recall it. In any case, I was not required to retain any of the content to graduate.
Prior to the 1960s American public high-school students were typically required to take three courses in civics—Civics, Problems of Democracy, and U.S. Government—today most get by with a single semester-long class and fewer than half the states test the students on what they have learned. Only 13 states require students to pass the USCIS civics test to graduate. Per the chart above, those states are also some of our least populated states. So, the vast majority of Americans are not getting any standardized civics education.
A 2024 study from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that more than 70% of Americans failed a basic U.S. civic literacy quiz; one in three respondents did not even know that there are three branches of government, much less what those branches are and what they do. The latest Constitution Day civics survey from the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center found that a mere 5% of the U.S. adults surveyed could name all five First Amendment rights, and 20% could not name any.
Ben Sheehan, the author of, What does the Constitution Actually Say? astutely points out, “It’s weird that a country run by ‘the People’ is full of people who don’t know how it runs.” And goes on to acknowledge the obvious, “If we don’t know how our government works, it’s hard for us to hold our elected leaders accountable.”
Our ignorance enables the media, corporations, and politicians to easily cherry pick and exploit the content of the constitution. Their power often comes from our ignorance. Take the second Amendment for example versus the 14th Amendment. It is hard to find an American citizen that does not recognize the second amendment is behind our right to bear arms. Influencers all over social media advertise it regularly, not to mention right-wing media and Republican politicians paid for by the gun industry. But only a small subset of the population knows that the 14th Amendment (ratified in 1868) is the bedrock behind guaranteeing all our rights, including separation of church and state. The 14th Amendment is equally powerful with respect to ensuring religion does not become a tool of government oppression as it is relevant to protecting gun owners’ rights. Our ignorance allows Christian nationalist Republicans and organizations like The Heritage Foundation to use the second amendment as a weapon against voting for common sense gun laws, while in parallel creating buy-in for the extreme Christian nationalist handbook Project 2025, and a range of conservative policies steeped in Christian ideals, such as anti-abortion laws.
It is also worth emphasizing that declines in civics literacy have corresponded with a decline in trust in government, a topic that Pew has studied since 1958. At that time, when Pew began examining the subject, about 75% of all Americans “trusted the federal government to do the right thing almost always or most of the time.” As of April 2024, that figure had declined to 24 percent. Not surprisingly trust varies by party depending on who controls the executive branch, but on average both parties have seen a significant decline in trust.
Including the President and Vice President there are 535 people elected by the people to run the government for the people. These elected officials have sworn an oath to the constitution. Only the constitution. Not to a given President, or even a particular “God”, even if they chose to swear on the Bible. Our government is neither hierarchical nor driven by a Deity. There is nothing in the constitution that references the use of a Bible for the swearing in. We are guaranteed the right to freedom of religion, and that includes none at all. In fact, John Quincy Adams used a book of law, and Teddy Roosevelt did not use any book at all.
In any case our elected official’s oath of office is specific only to upholding the constitution. They work for us, “The People”, and nobody else. Unfortunately, only 30% of The People can claim to know any details about the content of the constitution that defines our government’s framework, and 95% don’t even know all their first amendment rights.
Quick reminder: those rights are freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly (which includes peaceful protests), and the right to petition the government.
Today, there is a great deal of debate about a constitutional crisis with respect to the current administration’s willingness to abide by the courts (one of the co-equal branches of our government). But I’d argue we have an even more obvious crises with respect to the ignorance of people at large, including our 535 elected representatives, simply not understanding or valuing the importance of retaining the co-equal branches and how it guarantees our constitutional rights and freedoms stay intact. Perhaps this is because the majority of the 119th Congress have never taken civics, and the rest are too old to remember the lessons learned. Truth is nearly 1 in 4 congresspeople are over the age of 70.
Maybe we should require all congresspeople take a US Civics test and score greater than 90% before they can govern and be sworn in with an oath to abide by this powerful document, our constitution. And since we do not have term limits for all but two of the 535 elected officials, we should do like we do with drivers licenses in California. Require all congresspeople age 70 and older to renew their qualifications in person by passing a written test. While they’re at it they can take a hearing and vision test. This might improve their ability to hear and see truth. If we did this, it would apply to 33 senators and 84 congresspeople today.
Better yet, like the DMV, government should accept requests from family members for unsafe governing, and re-examine anybody on one of our co-equal branches of government if their skills are deteriorating. Of course, term limits would help a great deal.
Speaking of an old guy that needs some re-examining and a history class, Trump is turning 79 in the next few months, and he apparently has a fixation on the Gilded Age. He claims 1870-1913 is when America was at its finest and richest, and he seems to point to tariffs and protectionism as the primary driver of that glorious window of American industrialization.
Trump is right that the Gilded Age was indeed a time when people got rich, but only a very few. In fact, it was similar to, but even more extreme than what we are witnessing today. During the Gilded Age, only a very small percentage of Americans, the top 1-2% amassed vast wealth, controlling a significant portion of the nation’s resources, while the majority of the population struggled with poverty and low incomes. There was a name for these wealthy business tycoons during this Gilded Age, Robber Barons. They do deserve some credit for helping create the idea of the American Dream: that hard work and good fortune would bring wealth. However, they also exploited workers, often children, with low wages, long hours, and dangerous working conditions. They used their wealth to buy politicians, participated in price fixing, exploited workers to gain a competitive advantage, and built monopolies often at the expense of smaller businesses and consumers.
Some might also argue these same Robber Barons were captains of industry. Both are true, but according to Christopher Meissner, an authority in comparative economic history at UC Davis, tariffs are unlikely the reason for the accelerated growth. He states the key factors during the late 1800s included growth in innovation, education and immigration. Notably all the things the current regime is destroying in America today. The incandescent light bulb, the telephone and the typewriter were among the major innovations of that era. Meissner also noted the following:
“It’s worthwhile thinking about who the winners and losers are from tariffs. If we want an economy where lobbying is important – verging on corruption and favoritism and corporate welfare – we’ll go for tariffs. But if we want efficiency and innovation, low or no tariffs are the winning combination.”
Trump apparently believes his tariffs can bring in trillions of dollars to justify his tax cuts and perhaps stop taxing the rich altogether. So far, the market is on a downward spiral suggesting Wall Street is far from convinced, and the more likely outcome is economic isolation for the US and higher prices for everyone globally. We can only hope it does not lead to the next great depression like the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, passed in 1930. When we raised tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods to protect American farmers and industries, but ultimately worsened the economic crisis by triggering retaliatory tariffs from other nations and reducing international trade, extending the depression a decade longer. In any case, like the Gilded Age, cronyism is hard at work, and we may well be headed for the next generation of Robber Barons. It is safe to conclude this is most definitely not a government policy designed to bring prices down for the people or create global synergies that encourage peaceful cooperation and shared wealth internationally amongst our allies. The US is no longer considered a world leader with any sort of integrity.
It is also important to point out the following.
There is near unanimous consensus among economists that tariffs are self-defeating and have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare, while free trade and the reduction of trade barriers has a positive effect on economic growth. Famed economist Milton Friedman said of tariffs:
“We call a tariff a protective measure. It does protect . . . It protects the consumer against low prices.” So if higher prices are the goal, tariffs are the fastest path forward.
In any case, history points to tariffs as a very poor choice with respect to prosperity for all. It is clearly time to revoke Trump’s license to govern and buy him a history book.
Which brings me back to my main point. The constitution is a powerful document that we the people should be intimately familiar with and demand our elected representatives enforce.
The guardrails and people’s rights carefully designed into the framework and outlined in the constitution are essential to maintaining our democracy and freedom. When the guardrails and our rights are dissolved the checks and balances become non-existent. Per the constitution the President does not make laws, override laws, or even interpret laws to bend them to his wishes. Nowhere in the constitution is the executive branch empowered to rule exclusively by executive order. Doing so essentially turns our democracy into an autocracy. The powers across the three co-equal branches are intended to be separate with no overlap.
Legislative Branch (Congress) – creates laws.
Judicial Branch (Federal Courts) – interprets laws.
Executive Branch (Presidents/Vice President) – enforces laws.
We, like Congress, have constitutional powers too. We ‘The People’ must use our collective voice and First Amendment rights such as freedom of speech, and our right to petition the government by expressing our grievances and seeking redress through petitions and protests to make sure congress hears us and represent us the way they swore an oath to do so.
Unfortunately, we don’t have a parliamentary system like the UK where the President can be voted out of office on a No Confidence Motion by a majority of Parliament at any time. But we do have levers in our constitution.
One most obvious lever is impeachment, but a more immediate and likely option is to reinforce and, in some cases, reinstate the roles of the three co-equal branches.
With respect to tariffs Congress could stop the bleeding today. Under the U.S. Constitution, the power to tax and tariff falls squarely, and exclusively, within the legislative branch.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution states, “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises,” as well as “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.”
Only congress has this power per the constitution. Unfortunately, since the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913, granting Congress the power to levy and collect income taxes from any source allowing them to move away from tariffs, Congress has ceded more and more power to the executive branch. Today there are six statutory provisions currently in place that control how the president can use and apply tariffs. Three provisions require federal agency investigations before a tariff can be imposed. The other provisions do not require an investigation before actions are taken. Congress alone created these provisions, and Congress alone is empowered by the constitution to take them away and reinstate the checks and balances intended to protect us from tyranny by any given branch.
This needs to happen today.
With respect to the latest set of tariffs Trump has enacted the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. One of the three provisions that do not require investigation before taking action. This act allows the president to declare an emergency under the National Emergency Act (NEA) and then use his extensive economic powers to regulate or prohibit imports. Most importantly however, the emergency stated by the president can be terminated by a joint resolution of Congress. Hence reclaiming the co-equal power. Of course, our Republican congress has chosen not to act so far.
Again, Congress has the power to rescind and rewrite any of the six laws and reassert their power at any point. There is a slight catch worth mentioning. To avoid a veto by the President the new law must pass by 2/3 vote in both the house and the senate. A tall order with today’s heavily loaded Republican party leaning MAGA and or extreme Christian nationalist which includes the majority leaders, but not insurmountable if the state of the economy looks like it will sink all their future jobs, and their constituents (we the people) rise up with a single voice and make ourselves heard. We are already seeing defections on the senate side. Maybe this list of people took civics, or maybe they are beginning to fear the people more than Trump or the oligarchy threatening to pay for a primary challenger:
· Susan Collins of Maine
· Chuck Grassley of Iowa
· Mitch McConnell of Kentucky
· Jerry Moran of Kansas
· Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
· Thom Tillis of North Carolina
· Todd Young of Indiana
· Rand Paul of Kentucky
· Ted Cruz of Texas
In any case the tide does seem to be turning. April 5th more than 5 million of us joined in the streets across America and found our collective voice, pushing back with force and putting our power to work. We need that many more to join us and keep the momentum. It is time we made it clear Congress, specifically the Republicans, must act now and reassert their power or lose their power altogether in the 2026 elections.
We must and can continue to use our First Amendment rights. Participating in peaceful protests with millions in attendance is one of our most visible and powerful communication tools. In addition, our freedom of speech can and should include letters to the editors of every newspaper. We can and should build our own army of online influencers that share truth and push back on lies across all the social media channels, and of course maintain the phone calls, town halls and communication with our elected officials in our respective communities. It is our constitutional right to speak out individually and collectively. It is our power. Let’s use it.
Time to be bold. Time to be loud. We the people must set aside our own fear and put our rights to work if we want a government that works for all of us. We are not powerless. We have both the constitution and the majority on our side.
On a final note, if you haven’t read the constitution, or even if you have, I highly recommend the book ’What Does the Constitution Actually Say?’ by Ben Sheehan. It’s a fun read and it explains just what we should be holding our government accountable for.
Stay educated, think critically. Every truth matters.
Resources / references:
The West Point History Professor
Trump’s Political Position Is Very Precarious, Perhaps Fatal; Here’s A Plan
3 days ago · 617 likes · 43 comments · Terrence Goggin
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/04/trump-tariffs-congress-constitution-law-trade.html
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/how-congress-delegates-its-tariff-powers-to-the-president
https://www.yahoo.com/news/7-gop-senators-backing-bill-161249854.html
“What Does the constitution Actually Say?” by Ben Sheehan
https://vitz.ru/forums/index.php?autocom=gallery&req=si&img=4811