Author: C.L. GnoGno

In a representative democracy, elected officials such as members of Congress are civil servants. That means that they are supposed to serve the public that elected them by voting on issues in accordance with the sentiments of their constituents, who are the people in their district. They are not supposed to vote strictly for their political party’s agenda or as individuals. Instead, it is their responsibility to understand the needs of the people that they represent. This can be accomplished by answering letters, emails, phone calls, and other constituent correspondence. Members of Congress also allow constituents to visit them by appointment at their offices in the nation’s capital, and in their state offices during Congressional recesses, or days when Congress is not in session. Yet another way that politicians can take the pulse of the communities they represent is to visit with their constituents by holding town hall events.

TOWN HALL EVENTS ARE ROOTED IN COLONIAL TIMES

According to Smithsonian Magazine, the first political town hall meetings occurred in the New England town of Dorchester in 1633, when Massachusetts was a British colony. Other New England colonies adopted this citizen-driven practice, which “gave locals a way to have their say in local affairs [so that] the informal, majority-rules forum became a foundation of early American democracy.”¹ By the time of our nation’s founding, town hall meetings were a century’s-old form of political interchange.

In modern times, town halls are conducted online or in person. In either format, they are a way for members of Congress to get out of the Washington D.C. bubble and initiate contact with their voters. The onus is on politicians to deliver on campaign promises and to carefully consider constituent needs. His or her intent should be to explain recent decisions, to learn their home state priorities, and to discover how their own performance is being perceived by their voters.

Town hall meetings follow a question and answer format. As forums for civil discourse, listening is as important as speaking for everyone in attendance. Nonviolent dissent during political meetings is expected. Not everyone may agree with a politician’s stance on an issue. Effective politicians acknowledge dissent without retaliation. They encourage town hall attendees to tell their stories, so that it is clear how policies are effecting them. They approach voters as equals, which indeed they are, and attempt to actually address what is being asked of them.

OBJECTING IN MAGA TOWN HALLS CAN LEAD TO JAIL TIME

However, in Trump’s America, town halls have proven to be treacherous for townspeople and politicians alike. In fact, in April of 2025, “National Republican Congressional Committee Representative Richard Hudson advised his colleagues not to hold town hall meetings at all, after several Republicans came face-to-face with their angry constituents.”² Both Republican and Democratic politicians throughout the nation have encountered protests outside of scheduled town hall meetings, and disruptions within them, this year. While it is accepted practice to ask attendees to refrain from violent or egregious disturbances during these meetings, the difference between the two parties is that town hall disruptors in Make America Great Again (MAGA)-led districts have been escorted out of the building, tased, and even arrested for commonplace crowd reactions such as chanting, booing, or asking pointed questions that a MAGA Congressperson has disliked.

Dismissing and even criminalizing the heartfelt outrage expressed by constituents over unpopular policies is an arrogant and childish authoritarian reaction. Unfortunately, acting defensively rather than reflecting upon the reasons why constituents are angry are hallmarks of compassionless MAGA leadership. MAGA politicians who are unwilling to confront constituents that disagree with them, or who treat constituent challenges discourteously, appear wholly unfit for their office. They are following Trump’s formula of demanding loyalty and respect rather than earning it.

By and large, Trump does not engage in civil discourse; he is rarely civil in his responses and often acts as belligerent or as vindictive as possible, even to people who voted for him. Like Trump, most MAGA politicians are thin-skinned and lack relational intelligence. They consistently dish out criticism, but cannot handle it when constituents of any affiliation–conservative, independent, or liberal–question their actions or approach them with facts and repercussions. For instance, at an April 16th town hall meeting in Acworth, Georgia, a constituent of MAGA Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene shared her worries about Trump’s mental health and asked how Greene was going to protect Georgia voters from his caprice. Greene chose to mock her by replying, “‘Oh, poor Christina. Poor, poor Christina. Well, I’m sure, Christina, you think you’re pretty smart, but the reality is you are being completely brainwashed by whatever source of news you listen to.’”³

Greene could have assuaged this attendee’s fears by listing ways that she and her MAGA colleagues planned to keep citizens in her district safe. Instead, she sneered at her non-MAGA constituents and resorted to demeaning deflections. Town halls were not intended to be one-sided campaign speeches, or Trump rallies, which are akin to political theater. Trump’s rallies are entertainment and propaganda extravaganzas. His MAGA supporters attend them passively, content to parade around in MAGA attire with red hats and gold Trump sneakers while listening to self-aggrandizing speeches driven by a maximum of ad hominem and a minimum of substance. MAGA politicians like Greene seem to want town halls to resemble these rallies. They are ill-equipped to seriously debate anyone on important issues, or to defend their political positions.

It is a danger to our democracy that MAGA politicians are cultivating the fallacious idea of themselves as celebrities and saviors that should be revered and trusted without question. MAGA supporters have compared Trump to Jesus, for instance, and Trump himself posted an AI-generated image of himself as the Catholic Pope, who is considered infallible.⁴ The point may be to offend while asserting dominance, but Trump’s infantile behavior is not amusing. Our founders envisioned an active and educated electorate and presidents that comported themselves with dignity. MAGA leaders seem to have forgotten that as world leaders they have the greatest responsibility of service. They pledged an oath to uphold the constitution, which means that they must bend to the will of the people rather than the reverse.

OPPOSING VIEWS CAN BE PRODUCTIVELY ADDRESSED WITHIN TOWN HALLS

In a healthy democracy, townhalls are reciprocal rather than passive. They include respectful exchanges between politicians and their constituents, some of whom might not support them or their party. Praise can be given when due, but grievances can also be aired and solutions offered. This was the case in the April 19, 2025 townhall meeting of Washington State Representative Suzan DelBene in Lake Stevens, WA. She set the tone of respect and orientation towards service with her choice of venue, her choice of slides and materials, and her personable demeanor.

DelBene’s constituents had to register in advance for her town hall events in late April, and the locations were emailed to everyone just a few days before they took place. The Lake Stevens town hall was held in a commons area at Cavelero Mid High School. The civics teacher who introduced her explained her longstanding relationship with the school, including ongoing outreach with history and social studies students.

DelBene’s staff handed out materials to attendees that showcased her efforts to serve the community. An informational flyer entitled “Helping Washington Families and Businesses” began with a paragraph subtitled “How Can I Help You?” It referred to her pledge to help individuals and communities “take advantage of the benefits available to you.” Inside the flyer was specific information about how she and her staff could assist groups such as small business owners, veterans, seniors, students, immigrants, and homeowners. This stance, reinforcing the message that government officials are hired to work for instead of against citizens, is refreshing at a time when Trump and his MAGA allies are actively attempting to take rights and benefits away from Americans.

Throughout the town hall meeting, DelBene took pains to relate to her audience of constituents. After being introduced, she gave a brief summary of her background in the tech industry and her subsequent political career. She emphasized her family, and shared her excitement about welcoming a new grandchild. She then iterated that her goal in the town hall was to move from the theoretical to the personal. She wanted to hear stories from as many people as possible to understand the impacts of our current political reality.

Before opening the microphone to questions, she explained that she and her aides had consolidated the answers from the questionnaire that she had given to attendees ahead of time about which topics they wanted to discuss. Overwhelmingly, responses fell into two categories: concerns about the dismantling of government agencies, including the freezing and mishandling of funds and personal data by Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE); and concerns about the brutality and illegality of Trump’s immigration enforcement policies. More broadly, attendees wanted to know what she and her Democratic colleagues were doing about Trump.

DelBene acknowledged the difficulties of navigating a Congress in which there were only a few moderates willing to act in a bipartisan fashion. She agreed that it was fair to be scared and outraged in the face of Trump’s enormous executive overreach. She further admitted that the constitution has not been upheld in his first 100 days in office. The three branches of government are not coequal right now because Trump “feels like he can make decisions on his own and that is not the way [government] is supposed to work.”⁵

DelBene contended that in the face of Trump’s schemes to expand the executive branch, the other two branches need to assert their constitutionally defined roles. The legislative branch, she said, has to step up its oversight. She mentioned that she has called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, for example, after the Signalgate scandal.⁶ In Congress, she concluded, Democrats have to write and adjust laws and not abdicate the power of the purse or any other legislative power that Trump is trying to take over.

It is critical as well, DelBene conceded, for the judicial branch to continue to support due process and the rule of law. Unfortunately, a slew of lawsuits have been necessary to check the Trump administration’s unlawful acts. From the end of January to mid May, Just Security, an independent, non-partisan law and policy journal, has tracked a total of 239 lawsuits against the Trump Administration.⁷ DelBene expressed the hope that the judiciary would stand firm and interpret the law in a nonpartisan fashion.

CITIZEN VOICES NEED TO MATTER IN A DEMOCRACY

Beyond the branches of government, ordinary citizens have a critical role in shaping our nation’s future. DelBene quoted Abraham Lincoln by telling the town hall attendees, “in this age, in this country, public sentiment is everything.”⁸ She encouraged everyone to stand up for their rights and values and make them known to judges and legislators. She applauded the rise of civic engagement, recalling that a recent tele-town hall had 14,500 attendees. In previous years her online town halls had averaged 2,000 people.

DelBene’s voters admitted to feelings of helplessness in the face of MAGA chaos. One asked her, “Where is the line for you?” regarding the war in Gaza. A small group of students in attendance then chanted “Stop sending money and weapons!” DelBene let them chant for a moment, then reminded them of her publicly available position, which is that she supports a two-state solution and has called for ceasefires and the resumption of humanitarian aid to the area. She politely encouraged attendees to do their homework and to examine Congressional voting records.

DelBene did not pretend to have all of the answers that her constituents wanted for meeting this political moment. Not having a majority in either house of Congress has hampered the ability of Democrats to act. She did, however, repeat her assertion that public opinion makes a difference. “As communities demand protections we can see change,”⁹ she said. DelBene responded sympathetically when another constituent decried the seeming lack of urgency among legislators to resist Trump’s agenda. The constituent said that she had tried to reach MAGA legislators through letters and phone calls without result. DelBene replied that the messages were probably received but that she was “shut out because they [MAGA Congresspeople] didn’t want to hear what you have to say.” However, she commended her constituent’s efforts to reach across the aisle. “Talk to each other,” she urged, “even if you disagree. We learn that we are fellow human beings, and that can make a difference.”¹⁰

Footnotes

1. Jackie Mansky, “History of the Town Hall Debate,” Smithsonian Magazine, October 6, 2016, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/history-town-hall-debate-180960705/ ↩︎
2. Edith Olmsted, “MTG’s Town Hall Goes Haywire as Voters Tear Her to Shreds,” The New Republic, April 16, 2025, https://newrepublic.com/post/194051/marjorie-taylor-greene-town-hall-voters-shreds-tasered. ↩︎
3. Olmsted, 2025. ↩︎
4. Sophie Tanno, Christopher Lamb, and Antonia Mortensen, “Trump Posts AI Image of Himself as Pope, Leaving Catholics Offended and Unamused as Conclave Nears, CNN World, May 4, 2024, https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/04/world/trump-ai-image-pope-intl-hnk. ↩︎
5. Suzan DelBene, Cavalero Mid High School Town Hall Presentation, April 19, 2025. ↩︎
6. Jeffrey Goldberg, a reporter from the Atlantic, was accidentally “included in a group chat about upcoming military strikes in Yemen.” They had been using Signal, a messaging platform. This was a serious national security breach that was dismissed by the Trump administration even though it had the potential for risking the lives of military personnel.
   Jeffrey Goldberg, “The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans,” Atlantic Monthly, March 24, 2025, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/03/trump-administration-accidentally-texted-me-its-war-plans/682151/. ↩︎
7. “Litigation Tracker: Legal Challenges to Trump Administration Actions,” Just Security, May 15, 2025, https://www.justsecurity.org/107087/tracker-litigation-legal-challenges-trump-administration/. ↩︎
8. This quote is derived from a speech given by Abraham Lincoln in Ottawa, IL on August 21, 1858 while debating Stephen Douglas for an Illinois Senate seat. ↩︎
9. DelBene, 2025. ↩︎
10. DelBene, 2025. ↩︎

On the April 19th holiday weekend, the spring weather was an unpredictable roller coaster, alternating from cool and cloudy in the morning to delightfully warm and sunny in the afternoon. From midday onwards, it was a perfect time to gather outside. Hundreds of Pacific Northwesterners chose to spend a portion of the lovely, pre-Easter afternoon rallying to protect democracy. Their efforts, billed by some organizers as a National Day of Action, occurred in concert with approximately three million Americans who also made the decision to protest against the Trump administration in cities across the country. In some of the demonstrations held that day, protestors were asked to bring food donations, to sign petitions, or to sign up to vote.

At first glance, the April 19th protest in Everett, WA seemed sparsely attended. Low attendance was anticipated, due to the family holiday and the combined egg hunts and Earth Day celebrations scheduled in parks, church lawns, and public gardens across Washington state. However, initial impressions can be deceiving.

Everett, WA is the largest city in Snohomish County. In fact, it is the county seat. With a population of nearly 111,000 people, it ranks among the top ten populous cities in the state. It is also an important industrial port city, with a long historic past that pre-dates white settlement and official incorporation in 1893.

Broadway is a main drag in Everett. This bustling, downtown street parallels Interstate 5. On April 19th, when exiting the freeway and approaching Broadway from the north, it appeared as if there was a meagre pocket of protestors huddled together in a corner. However, it was soon evident that the protest had been spread out across the city. One could walk over three miles along Broadway, to Everett Community College, and encounter protestors on each corner of every Broadway block, if not spread out in between. Some protestors stayed put for hours, shouting and waving or listening to music. Others kept switching places, walking the length of the protest, making intermittent stops, even crossing at sidewalks to mingle with different protesters on the other side of the street.

Since it was a sunny holiday weekend, the protest took on a festive mood. Protestors took photos, admiring and complimenting each other’s signs. People came in costume or draped in the flags of the United States, Canada, and Mexico. There were dinosaurs, penguins, handmaidens, the Statue of Liberty. They brought with them noisemakers, glitter, and bubbles. Most of the travelers along Broadway honked in support. Some had mounted protest signs on their car windows. One man in a classy, red sportscar pulled over at each corner and handed out free donuts!

An idea arose, and was discussed among some participants, that it is time to make resistance fun and inviting! If protests are akin to street theater, then let’s harness the region’s creativity and truly make them theatrical experiences. Bring on flash mobs, musicians, dancers, puppets, street performers. Let’s write and record protest songs and poems, or crown a Miss, Mrs., and Mr. America Anti-Trump Protestor (masked for safety) with a criterion based on resilience and charitable deeds rather than on looks. Let’s make a slick, Protest of the Month calendar!

Protests are about serious matters, but they don’t have to be completely somber affairs. The urgency due to threats against freedoms and a constitutional crisis is real, and the horrific nature of Trump’s nightmarish rollout of Project 2025 should not be discounted. According to Erica Chenowith, a political science professor at Harvard University, “it takes around 3.5% of the population actively participating in protests to ensure serious political change.”¹ More and more people will have to take to the streets in nonviolent protest, and continue to do so, if we are to reach this important threshold. Yet as we move into the spring and summer months, why not try marrying pro-democracy events with block party vibes, which may draw in those who might otherwise not show up and be counted, and get them motivated to keep participating? Let’s showcase the kindness, the joy, the marvelous upsides of diversity and inclusion that seem anathema to the MAGA cultists and billionaires.

A Movement Not a Moment

The Trump administration is like the Grinch. He and his allies are greedy and oppressive. They seem to delight in punishing people. Still, the Grinch couldn’t prevent the advent of Christmas for the Who’s in Whoville. Similarly, we cannot allow the intimidation, extortion, corruption, the gloom and doom and lack of empathy displayed by Trump and his allies to dampen the spirits of the majority of people who care about America and retaining the democratic institutions that we rely upon. Trump’s cruelty is no match for the unstoppable energy of community that resistance movements which focus on positive change and interactions can produce in this country. Democracy will prevail if enough people unite with groups that serve the public good and won’t back down. As 50501 organizer Sarah Parker suggests, these protests are “not just about one day or even one presidency. [They’re] about putting down roots for a more just and equitable America.”²

Protesting can move the needle. There is strength in numbers, in non-violent hordes insistent upon fairness and dignity for all. The Trump administration and the state media can downplay resistance, but public opinion matters to politicians. Let them cower in our numbers, in the authenticity, tolerance, and optimism that Trump and his allies cannot bribe, or purchase, to achieve. Trump wants you to believe that resistance is futile, but that is a lie. To quote a song from the musical “Cabaret,” set in an earlier fascist era, “What good is sitting alone in your room? Come hear the music play. Life is a cabaret, old chum. Come to the cabaret!”³

Find a local protest group and show up! The next massive, single-day protest is on or around May Day. A few hours of your presence is not too much to ask. Bring a sign, an open mind, and your best self. Let’s prove that the MAGA mindset is not normal or sustainable. Future generations will thank you!

Footnotes

1. David Robson, “The ‘3.5% rule’: How a Small Minority Can Change the World, BBC News, May 13, 2019, https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world. ↩︎
2. “Massive Anti-Trump Protests Across 50 States: Who is Organizing Them and How People Can Participate: Here’s All You Need To Know,” Economic Times, April 17, 2025, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/massive-anti-trump-protests-on-april-19-across-all-u-s-states-who-is-organizing-them-and-how-people-can-participate-heres-all-you-need-to-know/articleshow/120414147.cms. ↩︎
3. Liza Minneli, “Cabaret,” Track 1, Cabaret (Original 1972 Movie Soundtrack), Valando Music Co. Ltd., 1972, Vinyl. ↩︎

At a plastics facility on March 14, 2025 in Bay City, Michigan, Vice President JD Vance smugly pontificated, “I’m sure all of us saw that there were a few protestors outside, and I can’t be the only person wondering… you know, it’s a little after noon on a Friday, and don’t you all have jobs? Who are these people? And I think that’s one of the reasons we’ve got to rebuild American manufacturing and support great companies like Vantage Plastics, because we want those people to get off the streets and back to work. It’d be good for them, and it would be good for everybody else, too.”¹

Vice Presidents take an oath to preserve and to protect the U.S. Constitution. Implicit in this role is service towards all Americans regardless of political party. Perhaps it would be good for the country, too, if Vance spent as much time and energy understanding his elected office as he does berating citizens that don’t agree with his far-right agenda.

Few people truly desire to be out on the streets protesting Make America Great Again (MAGA) policies. They do it because they feel that they must express their outrage! A thorough study of the U.S. Constitution might help Vance to grasp that for citizens of the United States, protesting against what are perceived as harmful government policies, especially those that violate the rule of law, is a protected right; a duty akin to a job for all thoughtful Americans.

Public shaming of peaceful protesters, instead of humanely addressing their real concerns, is the aggressive default tactic of the Trump administration and his allies. It is becoming modus operandi for Vance. Earlier in March, Vance became angry at attendees of a pro-Ukraine demonstration near his home in Connecticut. He claimed that they were stalking him and frightening his toddler, and later called them names on social media. Demonstrators told the Cincinnati Enquirer that “protesters weren’t following Vance, but happened to come upon him en route to the protest.”² This seems more likely, since Vance and his family are shadowed by Secret Service agents wherever they go. Vance’s security detail would not have allowed the general public to go anywhere near him without the Vice President’s permission, so Vance must have anticipated and perhaps even have deliberately forced a confrontation with demonstrators so that he could play the victim.

Considering the Grievances of All American Citizens is the Job of Elected Officials Like Trump and Vance

The long line of protestors that met Vance’s motorcade in Michigan on March 14th seemed to be worried about the overall direction that the federal government is taking. Protestors in all 50 states echo these fears. The signs that the Michiganders carried reflected a myriad of issues ranging from opposition to abortion bans, cuts to the federal workforce, the outsized political influence of billionaires and foreign dictators, potential cuts to healthcare services, union busting policies, and executive orders that violate civil rights.³

Who were those people wanting to be seen and heard by Vance? Informed Americans like Karen Tighe, former chair of the Democratic Party of Bay County, intent on exercising her freedoms in support of democracy. Tighe explained, “we rely on veteran’s benefits, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all of those things are on a chopping block with an unelected person [Elon Musk] showing off his chainsaw and making a joke of it. To us, it’s personal. It’s not a joke. Cutting those benefits is going to hurt people and we would like him [Vance] to take that message back to Washington.”⁴ Tighe was referring to a media stunt in which Musk used a real chainsaw prop as a metaphor for the destructive force he and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team have wielded upon government agencies.

Vance’s contempt for Tighe and her fellow Michiganders during his Bay City visit was transparent and illogical. It is a condescending leap to assume that people protesting on a Friday afternoon do not have jobs. Protestors like Tighe might have taken time off from work for the opportunity to directly express their dissent. Many of the protestors may have been retirees. Also, Americans have a variety of work schedules. Not everyone works nine-to-five weekday positions; not everyone desires or is suited for manufacturing work; and not everyone with a job works full-time, either.

Furthermore, when the administration that you head forces mass lay-offs on workers in important government institutions, with ripple effects to job sectors across the country, it is tone-deaf to sneer at the unemployed. It is tone-deaf to sneer at them even if these huge obstacles to employment weren’t deliberately being created by the Trump administration. A handful of pro-Trump supporters engaged in a mini counter-protest nearby. Did Vance’s snarky message about employment apply to them, as well?

Protests Are Inevitable in the Wake of Haphazard Governance

Investigating manufacturing declines in the United States may be worthwhile. However, data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, shows that currently the service sector, rather then manufacturing, is America’s strength. “America holds a global advantage in exports of services driven by business, travel, and intellectual property.”⁵ Business experts agree that it might take decades to create new supply chains, infrastructure, and regulatory entities to rebuild large-scale manufacturing in this country. Even if it did, many jobs would be automated to keep costs down. What is the Trump administration’s plan for jobless workers in the interim, even if a switch from a service economy to a manufacturing economy in our country is feasible? Nothing concrete on the economic front is being communicated to the American people.

Economic chaos is one of several crises created by a Trump administration that is completely out-of-touch with the plight of the non-white, non-male, and non-wealthy. In just a few months in office, Trump has made unprecedented decisions that have completely upended the lives of every American. Some alarming, authoritarian actions Trump and Vance have taken so far include:

*Authorizing the kidnapping and deportation of students and immigrants without due process.

*Declaring fake emergencies in order to bypass Congress and push through 124 executive orders so far (for context, President Biden signed 162 executive orders in his entire four-year term).

*Ignoring or openly defying judicial rulings.

*Dismantling government agencies that provide essential services to all Americans, particularly those that are most vulnerable, while awarding huge contracts to his billionaire cronies.

*Erasing historical records that don’t match his extremist ideology.

*Freezing federal funds including disaster relief to grant recipients such as non-profit groups and states without explanation.

*Alienating the United States from its closest allies, particularly Canada and Mexico.

*Imposing sweeping tariffs on goods from every country on the globe except Russia, triggering multiple crashes in the stock market and forcing U.S. businesses to raise their prices or risk bankruptcy.

Protesting Unpopular Policies Is a Constitutional Right

There is a shocking lack of transparency about how the federal government intends to handle the massive consequences of these actions except to tell the American people to willingly absorb the pain. “You have to cut the bone. You have to do what you have to do,”⁶ Trump said about his self-imposed trade wars. His vision of the United States increasingly is one of scarcity, retribution, and isolationism.

These are just a few reasons why protests against the Trump administration have become daily occurrences throughout the United States since Trump and Vance took office on January 20, 2025. Three fundamental rights guaranteed to all citizens that pertain to peaceful protests and expressions of dissent are covered by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. These include freedom of speech, freedom of peaceful assembly, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

The U.S. Supreme Court considers freedom of speech, assembly and petition to be cognate rights, or rights that are related to one another. However the right to petition, may be lesser known and understood. In the 2011 case, Borough of Duryea v. Guarnieri, the Court explained the interrelatedness of these freedoms.⁷ The Court wrote, “Both speech and petition are integral to the democratic process, although not necessarily in the same way. The right to petition allows citizens to express their ideas, hopes and concerns to their government and their elected representatives, whereas the right to speak fosters the public exchange of ideas that is integral to deliberative democracy as well as to the whole realm of ideas and human affairs. Beyond the political sphere, both speech and petition advance personal expression, although the right to petition is generally concerned with expression directed to the government seeking redress of grievance.”⁸ Protests are a way of publicly airing grievances against the government, and these grievances all fall into the category of public concerns.

Protests Have Gained Momentum in Trump’s America

While, smaller, pop-up protests are occurring with regularity (many protest groups are rallying on a weekly basis), large-scale single-day anti-Trump events are being planned as often as possible. These bigger, more coordinated rallies are being arranged by nationally recognized pro-democracy groups such as Indivisible, MoveOn, the Women’s March, and the 50501 Movement, among others. On April 5, 2025, for example, approximately 5 million Americans rallied and marched in cities around the country to the theme of Hands Off! This meant hands off things dear to Americans such as civil liberties, libraries, universities, and social programs like Meals on Wheels, Social Security, and Medicaid. Protests organizers declared that there were 1300 official Hands Off! protests nationwide. This figure seems grossly undercounted, because there were at least ten protest locations in the greater North Seattle area on that day. This is without counting two gatherings in downtown Seattle led by high-profile politicians such as Representative Pramila Jayapal and former Washington state Governor Jay Inslee, that garnered tens of thousands of participants each.

There were two afternoon protests on April 5th in the seaside town of Edmonds, WA alone. Edmonds has a population of approximately 42 thousand people. The first protest was emceed by internationally famous travel host Rick Steves. Over 2000 people showed up to hear him speak at a noontime rally in the Civic Center Park. 3000 more people attended a protest in another Edmonds location later in the afternoon. Therefore, almost twelve percent of the population of Edmonds protested on April 5th.

When Steves addressed the crowd in Edmonds, he focused on three main issues: MAGA narratives, public wealth, and the importance of solidarity. Steves asked attendees to resist dark, punitive, and xenophobic MAGA narratives. He had just returned to the United States from Turkey, which also has a strong-arm leader in Recep Erdogan. Steves explained how the erosion of democratic norms in the United States by the Trump administration harms democracies around the world. He noted that, “since World War II people have looked to our country for leadership. Right now that is on the line. What empowers dictators [around the world]? America checking out. America building walls. America saying ‘America First.’”⁹

Steves insisted that the language of MAGA must be countered, corrected, and reclaimed. For example, he began his speech by professing that pro-democracy protests are “not America bashing. We don’t gather as Democrats or Republicans. This is more fundamental than that. We gather as patriots.”¹⁰ He asked attendees to be courageous, critical thinkers when confronted with MAGA doublespeak. “It’s not a deep state,” for instance, Steves declared. “That sounds demonic. You want to get rid of it if you’re not a very thoughtful voter. Nowadays climate activists are framed as climate extremists. When you hear somebody good framed into something bad, speak out. Don’t allow it.”¹¹

Steves further decried the actions of MAGA oligarchs who are stifling dissent and legitimate press. He insisted that, “when you shut down the scientist, when you shut down the professor, when you shut down the principled judge, the doctor, the military leader whose loyalty goes to the [U.S.] Constitution and not a dictator, when you shut down the people who care for the environment and not for my quarterly profit statement…when you shut down these things you shut down what makes America great.”¹²

Steves then pointed out the evil irony of a leader like Trump, elected by the working class, who penalizes the poor with tariffs and other regressive taxes while lowering taxes for the billionaire class. He denounced the short-sided greed of oligarchs who seek to privatize public institutions, viewing them as “low hanging fruit for profit.”¹³ Steves observed that the public institutions Trump and his allies are trying to destroy are collective entities, paid for by all Americans to make society sustainable for all Americans, and not just the wealthy. He urged the crowd to “think of public wealth, national parks, your retirement accounts, education, national medicine. Why do they target it? Not to make the United States a better place, but to make the filthy rich even richer. Public wealth is ours; it’s not for the oligarchs. Remember that.”¹⁴

The structural supports of our government are being dismantled in front of our eyes by the Trump administration, Steves asserted, because Trump wants complete power. He does not believe in the U.S. Constitution or the system of checks and balances that the Founding Fathers put in place to limit the reach of the executive branch. Steves said, “‘they [checks and balances] support the house of democracy. He knows it. His team knows it, they’re targeting it, and it could not be more anti-American.”¹⁵

Several times in his speech, Steves praised those that had gathered for their willingness to mobilize to ensure the continuance of all that is being threatened in our society by the Trump administration. He explained that “this is the biggest challenge in our lifetimes to the democracies that our children are going to be living with.”¹⁶ He urged people to set aside differences for the common goal of preserving democracy. “We gather in solidarity [not for just one issue] and solidarity is our only hope. Trump is counting on the fact that half of us don’t care about the environment, and half of us don’t care about LGBTQ plus, and half of us don’t care about education, and half of us don’t care about public television. But together we are invincible and all of those things are important.”¹⁷

Use it Or Lose It

Once Steves finished his speech, organizers played the Bob Marley tune “Get Up Stand Up” while crowds dispersed to march from the downtown Edmonds area towards Brackett’s Landing, an ocean-side park near the Edmonds ferry terminal. Marley’s anthem is a call to action to assert civil rights during times of oppression. Some protestors in Edmonds expressed their urgency to protest MAGA actions while First Amendment freedoms are still guaranteed.

Data from the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law shows that 45 of the 50 U.S. states have sponsored anti-protest bills since 2017. 50 out of 345 anti-protest bills proposed by state legislators have been enacted, while 40 are currently pending.¹⁸ These bills cover a range of topics from making it illegal to wear masks or obscure your identity during protests, criminalizing protests on campuses by blocking the visas and student loans of campus protestors, prohibiting small businesses from receiving funds from repairs near protest sites, and criminalizing protests in specific areas including residences and churches.

HB1323, a bi-partisan bill introduced in January 2025 in the Washington State House of Representatives, is currently in committee. It aims to limit the scope of mass protests by making it illegal to intentionally obstruct highways. The twelve bill drafters, three of whom are Democrats while the bulk are Republicans, “recognize the right to peacefully assemble,” but find that “endangering people’s lives, the traveling public, and law enforcement officers is not part of a civil society when there are plenty legal and safe times and locations for public discourse and assemble.”¹⁹If this bill is voted into law, obstructing highways during protest would be a C felony, subject to a steep fine and at least a month of imprisonment. Though this bill, which is framed as a safety measure, seems more tolerable in the wake of more blatant anti-protest bills advanced in other states, anti-protest bills like this can set a precedent for future limits on guaranteed freedoms.

Don’t Give Up the Fight

Despite propaganda to the contrary, non-wealthy citizens are suffering in Trump’s America. Tariffs, deportations, lawsuits, layoffs, service cuts, human rights abuses… the list of MAGA atrocities is long and overwhelming and no one will save us from this coup unless we continue to exercise the civic rights of freedom of speech, assembly, and petition against grievances. As of April 2025, protests remain tools of democracy that can bring change throughout the nation. Protests bring people together, providing community and showing others that they are not alone. When extensive enough, and over time, they exert public pressure on policy makers that cannot easily be ignored.

Works Cited:

Cui, Jasmine. “The White House is Using Tariffs to Restore Manufacturing. Data Suggests It Will Take Time.” NBC Universal Media. April 4, 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/trump-tariffs-manufacturing-us-business-jobs-economy-rcna199721.

International Center for Not-For-Profit-Law. “U.S. Protest Law Tracker.” Last accessed April 18, 2025, https://www.icnl.org/usprotestlawtracker/?location=&status=pending&issue=&date=&type=legislative#.

Justia. “Borough of Duryea, et al. v. Guarnieri, 564 U.S. 379 (2011).” https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/564/379/.

Stokols, Eli, and Adam Cancryn, Dasha Burns, Daniel Desrochers. “Trump Hits Pause on Trade War.” Politico. April 9, 2025, https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/09/trump-pauses-tariffs-00281494.

Wartman, Scott. “Protestors Outside His Cincinnati Home Angered Vance: What We Know.” Cincinnati Enquirer. Updated March 11, 2025, https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/10/what-we-know-about-the-confrontation-between-protesters-and-vance/82221437007/. 

WNEM Digital. “Protestors, Supporters Face Off During Vice Presidents Mid-Michigan Visit.” March 14, 2025, https://www.wnem.com/2025/03/14/protesters-supporters-face-off-during-vice-presidents-mid-michigan-visit.

Footnotes:

1. “JD Vance to Protestors: Don’t You All Have Jobs?” Daily Mail World, March 14, 2025. Video, 0:00:28, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3cqs4JcEks. ↩︎
2. Scott Wartman, “Protestors Outside His Cincinnati Home Angered Vance: What We Know,” Cincinnati Enquirer, updated March 11, 2025, https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/10/what-we-know-about-the-confrontation-between-protesters-and-vance/82221437007/. ↩︎
3. “Protestors Greet JD Vance Motorcade in Michigan,” MLive. March 14, 2025. Video, 00:01:33, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2RuoY63TOY&t=86s. ↩︎
4. “Protestors, Supporters Face Off During Vice Presidents Mid-Michigan Visit,” WNEM Digital, March 14, 2025, https://www.wnem.com/2025/03/14/protesters-supporters-face-off-during-vice-presidents-mid-michigan-visit. ↩︎
5. Jasmine Cui, “The White House is Using Tariffs to Restore Manufacturing. Data Suggests It Will Take Time,” NBC Universal Media, April 4, 2025, https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/trump-tariffs-manufacturing-us-business-jobs-economy-rcna199721. ↩︎
6. Eli Stokols, Adam Cancryn, Dasha Burns, and Daniel Desrochers, “Trump Hits Pause on Trade War,” Politico, April 9, 2025, https://www.politico.com/news/2025/04/09/trump-pauses-tariffs-00281494. ↩︎
7. This case debated whether or not the right of petition applied to personal grievances or only to those of public concern. The ruling favored applying the right of petition for issues of public concern in this case of a personal grievance between two government employees. ↩︎
8. “Borough of Duryea, et al. v. Guarnieri, 564 U.S. 379 (2011),” Justia, https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/564/379/. ↩︎
9. “Rick Steves ‘Hands Off’ National Day of Protest, Edmonds, WA,” April 5, 2025. Video, 00:24:52, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86hnPrWozUo. ↩︎
10. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
11. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
12. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
13. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
14. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
15. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
16. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
17. Steves, 2025. ↩︎
18. “U.S. Protest Law Tracker,” International Center for Not-For-Profit-Law, last accessed April 18, 2025, https://www.icnl.org/usprotestlawtracker/?location=&status=pending&issue=&date=&type=legislative#. ↩︎
19. House Bill 1325, https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1323.pdf?q=20250418131803. ↩︎

In a White House meeting on April 10, 2025, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi reported to the president’s cabinet that, “you gave us a directive to prosecute the people who are going after Tesla to the fullest extent of the law. They’re all looking at 20 years in prison.”¹ She was referring to Department of Justice property crime allegations against four unnamed Tesla Takedown protestors, and she hinted at future arrests.

Tesla Takedown is the nickname of the worldwide movement, begun in February of 2025, to boycott the Tesla automotive brand owned by Elon Musk. Protests associated with this boycott arose in response to Musk’s egregious attempts at domestic and international election interference, and the reckless gutting of federal government institutions by his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team. Overwhelmingly, these protests are peaceful gatherings on public spaces such as sidewalks that are near but not within Tesla dealership property.

Violence, harassment, and other criminal behavior is not condoned in these volunteer-powered, grass-roots demonstrations, which mainly consist of a few hours of sign-carrying, flag waving, and chanting. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported in March that vandalism against Tesla vehicles in the United States has been spontaneous and isolated. Agency officials asserted that “these criminal actions appear to have been conducted by lone offenders, and all known incidents occurred at night. Individuals require little planning to use rudimentary tactics, such as improvised incendiary devices and firearms, and may perceive these attacks as victimless,”² they said.

Both Trump and Bondi, however, are disseminating disinformation about leftist funding sources for Tesla property crimes. They are intentionally trying to exaggerate the boycott situation, equating all Tesla protestors with the handful of criminal outliers, without citing any concrete evidence. This move is yet another of his administration’s intimidation tactics aimed at quashing dissent. In a March statement that contradicted FBI reports, Bondi announced that she would “continue investigations that impose severe consequences on those involved in these attacks, including those operating behind the scenes to coordinate and fund these crimes.”³

On March 10, 2025, the day before his unethical advertising stunt on the South Lawn of the White House where he pledged to buy a Tesla and wasted countless tax dollars to shamelessly urge all of his supporters to follow suit, Trump went out of his way to disparage Tesla protestors and spread lies about them. He wrote, “the Radical Left Lunatics, as they often do, are trying to illegally and collusively boycott Tesla, one of the World’s great automakers, and Elon’s ‘baby,’ in order to attack and do harm to Elon, and everything he stands for.”⁴ Later in March, he gleefully announced his resolution to reclassifying Tesla vandalism as a terrorist offense. He threatened to deport offenders, whom he called “sick terrorist thugs”⁵ to El Salvadorean prisons. Horrifically, these unprecedented deportations to Trump-endorsed Central American penal colonies may occur regardless of citizenship status and without due process unless courts intervene.

If a mandatory 20-year sentence at an international prison seems grossly disproportionate to vehicular damage and destruction, it is. Vehicle damage is not a federal crime. In Washington state, the sentencing for an intentional vehicular property crime would vary according to the degree and amount of the damage. The highest charge, a Class B Felony for 1st Degree Malicious Mischief, would carry a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine.⁶

Boycotts are Rooted in Our Country’s History

Contrary to Trump’s remarks, boycotts are not illegal in the United States. Certainly, their legality is not subject to his or any president’s whims. Within the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights guarantees all American citizens the freedom of speech and the right to peaceful assembly. Peaceful boycotts are associated with these two rights, and are therefore legal and protected activities.

In a democracy, boycotts are commonplace collective actions exerted by groups of citizens to put economic, social, and/or political pressure on the target of the boycott. Throughout our nation’s history, groups have boycotted people, businesses, and institutions to express their displeasure with unpopular policies and to call for change. For example, in the 1800s, “abolitionists organized boycotts of domestic and international companies that participated in the slave trade and supported slavery in the United States. Antifascist protesters boycotted Japanese silk during World War II. And, in the 1980s, human rights advocates organized a widespread and ultimately successful campaign to boycott apartheid South Africa.”⁷

Colonial boycotts involving commodities such as sugar, tea, and stamps pre-date the Revolutionary War and the founding of our nation. The 1773 Boston Tea Party, for instance, was one of the largest and earliest boycotts on U.S. soil. It was enacted by colonists in defiance of the Tea Act, which gave the British East India Company a monopoly on tea sales in the colonies and imposed steep tariffs (which amounted to a large colonial tax) upon it. Colonists therefore stopped buying British tea in favor of homegrown tea or Dutch imports. This led to an unwanted British tea surplus, and the destruction of shipments of British tea leaves, which were thrown into the Boston Harbor. “A second Boston Tea Party in March 1774 encouraged other tea-dumping demonstrations in Maryland, New York, and South Carolina.”⁷

As the boycott of the British East India Company hampered British tea sales in the colonial era, the Tesla Takedown has had a major economic impact on the Tesla car brand. Car sales have dropped precipitously since the boycott began, as have shares of Tesla stock. However, neither of these actions can be characterized solely as corporate boycotts. At its essence, the Boston Tea Party was a revolt against unfair taxation. Similarly, the Tesla boycott is a revolt against the grotesque executive branch overreach perpetrated by Trump and his allies like Musk. This is evidenced by the protest signage, the majority of which have pro-democracy and anti-oligarchy messaging.

The ultimate goal of the Tesla Takedown, then, is to influence political action, rather than merely to inflict economic harm. People want billionaires, especially Musk, to stop taking away civil liberties and eliminating federal entities for power and personal gain. According to the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU), “if a boycott is an attempt to influence political reform, it will likely be considered to be protected by the First Amendment.”⁸ Judicial precedents such as the 1982 Supreme Court ruling in NAACP vs. Claiborne Hardware Co. (regarding the boycott of a segregated business) support the constitutionality of the Tesla Takedown boycott.

Yet even this interpretation, proffered by MTSU law professor Dara E. Purvis, may be too narrow for organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which believe that any anti-boycott legislation or ruling has the potential of limiting free speech and undermining the fundamental rights of citizens. Purvis’s more nuanced approach recognizes a “tension between the First Amendment rights of boycott organizers to convince others to join their campaign of petitioning for change, and antitrust and restraint of trade laws intended to prohibit harmful economic manipulation, such as price fixing or conspiratorial behavior.”⁹ The conspiratorial behavior that Purvis references is one of self-interest and personal gain by a boycotting group. It stems from the 1990 court case Federal Trade Commission v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association, in which lawyers staged a boycott to obtain a salary increase. The ACLU, however, contends that “the core principle of the First Amendment is that the government cannot dictate to its citizens which causes they can and can’t support.”¹⁰ The ACLU has been consistent in their calls for “hands off the right to boycott,” as emboldened far-right government officials attempt to pass laws that restrict them.

You Can’t Have it Both Ways

Trump and his supporters likewise would be culpable if boycotts were indeed illegal. Many presidents have called for diplomatic boycotts, but Trump is the first to routinely urge conservatives to boycott U.S. businesses. For ten years now, since his foray into presidential politics in 2015, he has consistently demanded that his supporters stop patronizing homegrown companies such as Macy’s, Nike, Apple, AT&T, Keurig, and Goodyear Tires for perceived slights against him and the Trump brand. Businesses have gone in and out of his favor, depending on their willingness to donate to his presidential campaigns or to capitulate to other Republican demands. Trump’s self-interested actions represent clear conflicts of interest unworthy of anyone aspiring towards or currently holding the presidential office.

In April of 2021, for example, Trump created a laundry list of corporations that he demanded conservatives boycott due to ideological differences. He said, “it is finally time for Republicans and Conservatives to fight back— we have more people than they do— by far! Boycott Major League Baseball, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, JPMorgan Chase, Viacom CBS, Citigroup, Cisco, UPS and Merck. Don’t go back to their products until they relent. We can play a better game than them.”¹¹ Though he touts the “America First” slogan, Trump seems to regard using the consumer power of his base against American corporations as a game; a fair game, that is, only if his party is the one initiating the boycott.

Currently, far-right Republicans are boycotting TV shows such as Saturday Night Live and corporations such as Starbucks coffee. The latter boycott is a reaction to a viral video made by Starbucks union members on April 1, 2025 in a show of solidarity for their fellow employees who were being threatened and detained by the Trump administration. Workers “halted a few minutes of their services across the nation as a form of protest against the recent illegal deportation of immigrants.”¹² The Starbucks boycott, then, is a counter-protest by Trump supporters who condone unlawful, politically-motivated deportations, all without due process, and want them to continue.

People Power vs. Corporate Control

Meanwhile, anti-Trump groups are boycotting more than just Tesla. Amazon, Target, Walmart, and Facebook are just a few other companies that democratic-leaning individuals are avoiding because they have supported the Trump administration financially or have complied with unpopular policies such as those against diversity and inclusion. In early March, “the non-partisan, grassroots People’s Union USA explained democratic boycott strategy by saying that “our strength lies in economic power. If corporations control politicians through money, then we control corporations by withholding ours. Targeted boycotts, economic blackouts, and financial pressure will make them listen.”¹³

The Tesla Takedown protest on the Mukilteo Speedway in Lynnwood, WA on April 12, 2025 was one of at least a half a dozen similar protests at Tesla dealerships that were announced on social media in the Greater Seattle area that weekend. Attendees at the speedway location have been regularly protesting there since DOGE began mass layoffs at government offices. Over 100 people showed up at the busy motorway on that balmy Saturday afternoon. Most of them were middle aged and older. Some admitted that their protest gear–political t-shirts, pink pussy hats, and flags–were items they had worn or carried in marches and protests during Trump’s first administration.

Everyone seemed to agree, however, that the situation today is more dire than it was back in 2016. Attendees expressed shock at the rapidity of the country’s descent into authoritarian rule by oligarchs like Elon Musk. They fear for future generations. A unifying resolve among them was the desire to not be complicit in Trump’s cruel and anti-democratic policies. Taking a stance through protests, consumer boycotts, and appeals to politicians, has been an important outlet for their present anti-Trump outrage.

Many motorists on the heavily trafficked speedway honked or waved in support of the Tesla protestors. Other simply ignored them. One driver hurled obscenities out the window and accused attendees of being paid to be there by liberal investor and philanthropist George Soros. The far-right conspiracy theory that billionaire Soros pays all anti-Trump protestors has been circulating since Trump first held office. It is a demeaning projection, because Trump allies like Musk have had to pay for Republican votes and petitions. The simple truth is that far-right narcissists perceive everything as transactional, meaning they always look for how they will benefit in a situation. They cannot comprehend that Tesla Takedown protestors are not motivated by personal gain; they are engaging in political action voluntarily because they are angry about what is happening to our country!

Another motorist in the turn lane closest to the sidewalk sped up when he saw protestors, and greatly exceeded the speed limit. It was evident that this driver intended to intimidate protestors and even clip them as he sped past them if he was able. The long line of protestors jumped backwards, as if in a wave, reacting to the real possibility of being hit by the driver. After this incident, attendees shared ideas for being safe during protests, which is a real concern in Trump’s America even in a blue state like Washington.

Americans have been boycotting businesses since they were British colonists. Consumer boycotts are a legal and necessary populist check on corporate culture. They remind businesses and other entities that their role is to innovate in ways that serve the best interests of their customers. Consumers who participate in boycotts assert their agency by aligning their spending habits with their cultural or political values. This is an astute way for citizens to modify their consumer habits even when not participating in a mass boycott movement.

Works Cited:

1. Theo Burman, “Pam Bondi Teases Huge Arrest Over Tesla Attacks,” Newsweek, April 11, 2025, https://www.newsweek.com/pam-bondi-tesla-protest-arrest-elon-musk-2058422.
2. Burman, 2025.
3. Shane Croucher, “Trump Touts Prison in El Salvador for Tesla Attackers,” March 21, 2025, https://www.newsweek.com/trump-touts-prison-el-salvador-tesla-attackers-2048498.
4. Croucher, 2025
5. Croucher, 2025.
6. “Mount Vernon Vandalism: Understanding Malicious Mischief in Washington,” Washington State Attorneys, last accessed April 15, 2025, https://www.washingtonstateattorneys.com/mount-vernon-vandalism-understanding-malicious-mischief-in-washi.html.
7. “In Congress, A Threat to Americans’ Right to Boycott,” ACLU, January 28, 2019, https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/congress-threat-americans-first-amendment-right-boycott.
8. “Boston Tea Party,” History.com, last updated February 27, 2025, https://www.history.com/articles/boston-tea-party.
9. Dara E. Purvis, “Boycotts,” Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, last updated July 5, 2024, https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/boycotts/
10. ACLU, 2019.
11. Jordan Williams, “Trump Calls for Republicans to Boycott Companies Amid Voting Law,” The Hill, April 4, 2021, https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/546349-trump-calls-for-sweeping-boycott-of-companies-protesting-georgia-voting/.
12. “‘Boycott Starbucks’ is Trending on X: Maga Activists Big Call Ater Coffee Chain Stopped Services Across U.S.” The Economic Times, April 13, 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/general/boycott-starbucks-is-trending-on-x-maga-activists-big-call-after-coffee-chain-stopped-services-across-us/ar-AA1COULE?ocid=BingNewsSerp.
13. Garritt C. Van Dyk, “Consumer Resistance is Rising in the Age of Trump: History Shows How Boycotts Can Be Effective,” The Conversation, March 5, 2025, https://theconversation.com/consumer-resistance-is-rising-in-the-age-of-trump-history-shows-how-boycotts-can-be-effective-251448.

The Peace Arch Historical State Park in Blaine, Washington and the Peace Arch Provincial Park in Surrey, British Columbia occupy the same tract of land. Visitors to this 43-acre transitional space can enter from either the United States or Canada and freely commingle amidst the manicured lawns “without passing through a port of entry.”¹ While it is wise to carry identification, if you stay within the confines of the park, passports and other documentation have traditionally been unnecessary.

The focal point of the park is the Peace Arch, a distinctive 67-foot neoclassical archway that spans the borderline dividing the two countries. It stands firmly and eloquently as a symbol of international cooperation. An inscription on the interior of the monument commemorates the 1814 Treaty of Ghent, which ended the War of 1812. This treaty restored peace and amicable relationships between the United States and Canada (then Great Britain) and established commissions to reexamine national boundaries. Other inscriptions, such as “Children of a Common Mother,” emphasize unity and coexistence, suggesting that “the the highest goal between great nations should be perfect peace.”²

The creation of the park was a communal effort. The archway was commissioned by U.S. financier and humanitarian, Samuel Hill, who yearned for world peace. “In a letter written to Samuel Hill and read at the Peace Arch dedication ceremony [in 1921], President [Warren J.] Harding praised the creators of the portal. According to Harding, all of humankind could look to the U.S./Canadian border as a model for peace and as a sign of global progress.” ³ By 1930, children in both countries had donated almost 4,000 dollars to purchase and to improve the land around the monument. With the addition of state and provincial funds, the entire joint-park project, including its rose gardens, kitchens, and picnic shelters, was officially completed in 1939. Ever since then, it has been a regional, transnational gathering place, with annual events such as the Hands Across the Borders Celebration.

Inexplicably, however, in early 2025, the U.S./Canadian border became viewed by members of the Trump administration as a contested space. At an Oval Office press conference on March 25th, President Donald Trump referred to the border between the United States and Canada as “an artificial line, that straight artificial line that looked like it was drawn by a ruler; I don’t mean a ruler like a king, I mean a ruler like a ruler. It’s just an artificial line that was drawn in the sand, or in the ice.”⁴ To suggest that the northern border between the United States and Canada is an artificial line is misleading, dismissive, and hypocritical.

Borders Are Intentional

Borders between states and countries can be natural or political; the latter created through binding legal agreements. For example, in Washington state, the Pacific Ocean and the Strait of Juan de Fuca are natural land features that form the border to the west. The Columbia River is a natural land feature that forms a partial border to the south.

The political boundaries of states such as Washington are artificial in the sense that they are manmade. However, the word artificial has many negative connotations such as fakeness or disingenuousness. These do not apply to political borders since they are not arbitrary divisions.

Washington state’s political borders were scientifically and geometrically determined. While it might be an accurate observation to describe political boundaries, particularly in midwestern and western states, as appearing to have been drawn by a measuring tool such as a ruler, they follow a grid-like system by design rather than caprice. These lines are the result of federal surveys conducted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and correspond to cartography lines of latitude and longitude. Furthermore, they adhere to federal policies such as the Land Ordinance of 1785, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, and various homestead acts in the 19th and 20th centuries.

A close examination of a map of Washington state reveals that the southeast corner that forms the boundary between Oregon and Washington exactly follows the 46th parallel. To the east, the boundary between Idaho and Washington falls directly upon the 117th meridian. Crossing these boundaries makes one subject to different laws, different civil jurisdictions, and in some cases, differing cultures and ideologies.

International Borders are Covenants Between Sovereign Nations

The same holds true for international political boundaries. “The Canada-United States border is the longest international border in the world at 5,525 miles. There are more than 100 land border crossings between Canada and the USA.”⁵ The evolution of this international border is complex because the history of the two countries has been intertwined since America’s founding. Starting with the Treaty of Paris in 1873, which ended the Revolutionary War, each stage of U.S. expansion required border negotiations. Borders are mutually agreed upon, and according to international law cannot be unilaterally dissolved.

Between 1873 and 1909 there were at least seven treaties that affected the U.S.-Canadian border. Both the Treaty of 1818 and the Oregon Treaty of 1846 effectively established the international boundary between the United States and Canada at the 49th parallel. The Treaty of 1818 established the border from the east to the Rocky Mountains, while the Oregon Treaty established the boundary west of the Rockies.

Beginning in 1857 and lasting until 1862, commissions from both countries, consisting of teams of astronomers and surveyors, undertook the arduous task of ascertaining the border and erecting 161 survey monuments to mark its location. The U. S. Northwest Boundary Commission included gifted scientists such as Archibald Campbell, the chief commissioner who was a career civil service engineer; John G. Parke, the chief astronomer and surveyor who later became a Civil War hero and a superintendent at West Point; and topographer Henry Custer, whose extensive travels and documentation, particularly in the North Cascades, greatly added to the geological record. In all, nearly two hundred men were required to support the survey parties.

These scientific commissions calculated each geographic position astronomically. “Latitudes were determined with the zenith telescope [which helps establish latitude]; azimuth and time with the transit [meaning that altitude and sun and moon angles were a factor in finding coordinates]. Longitudes were determined by chronometer [a mechanical timepiece], by moon-culminating stars [stars that reach the meridian along with the moon], and at one station, by solar eclipse.”⁶ The accuracy of their work, done without current technologies such as computers and global positioning systems (GPS), should be honored as remarkable feats of engineering.

In Washington state, the work of the U.S. Northwest Boundary Commission was further complicated by oceanic boundary disputes. At stake were the San Juan Islands, which do not fall tidily into the 49th parallel designation. Joint occupation of the islands ended in 1872. At this time, German Emperor Kaiser Wilhelm I, chief arbitrator in the dispute, sided in favor of the United States by setting the border at the Haro Strait. His decision cemented the final boundary between the United States and Canada.

Borders Don’t Create Territorial Sovereignty

At 1,933 miles, the southern border between the United States and Mexico is less than half the length of its border with Canada. Yet there have been no calls from the current administration to nullify this shorter political border, or to annex Mexico. Instead, tax dollars are being used to create physical barriers at the southern border including buoy sensors, fences, and walls. Federal officials estimate that “85 miles of new border wall is expected to go up this year with plans for hundreds of miles more in 2026 and beyond.”⁷

Both Canada and Mexico have been long-time allies with the United States, yet one border is deemed by the current administration to be almost immaterial, while the other border is being materially strengthened. The divisive and uneven stance towards these bordering nations is disrespectful, short-sighted, and ultimately self-destructive.

According to University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Beth Simmons, territorial sovereignty is created internally rather than externally. This means that laws and other forms of control work best inside a country rather than on its fringes. Borders are shared spaces, so border policies that focus almost exclusively on perceived security threats with shows of force, suspicion, and aggression towards those that attempt to cross them legally or illegally, are inhumane and counter-productive.

The Trump administration weaponizes border regions, creating an atmosphere of fear and escalating tensions along them. When operating in this detrimental mindset, the border emerges as a gate that locks people in and out. Simmons, however, likens border regions to bridges. She envisions borders as “cooperative institutions to which states have consented to avoid international conflict”⁸ by working in concert with one another for collective interests, connection, and security.

Another apt metaphor for Simmons convictions about borders is a see-saw; a game of balance where back and forth motion between participants is mutually beneficial. Fittingly, in 2020, the winner of the London Design of the Year Award was a collection of pink see-saws called the Teeter Totter Wall. The see-saws were the inspiration of two California professors of design and architecture, Virginia San Fratello and Ronald Rael. San Fratello and Rael positioned the see-saws so that they straddled a portion of the steel border fence that separates El Paso, Texas from Ciudad Juarez in Mexico. The see-saw creators “said they hoped the design would help people reassess the effectiveness of borders and encourage dialogue rather than division. ‘We have to think about how we can be connected and be together without hurting each other’ said San Fratello.”⁹ Families from both countries that joyously interacted with one another on the see-saws proved that common ground at the border can be easily established.

International Borders are Better Managed Cooperatively

To reduce our international borders to artificial, territorial lines of sovereignty, commerce, and transit is to dehumanize them. Borders are inherently permeable. For over 200 years, citizens in the United States and Canada, for example, have operated under the principles of good neighborliness in international relations. This means that governance decisions primarily have been “based on general aspects of morality, tolerance, and abstention from any action that would harm the interests of other parties.”¹⁰ The good will and relational ties that exist in borderlands, particularly among long-term allies, should not be underestimated.

Currently, “Washington [state] has 13 land border crossings along the 427 miles it shares with British Columbia.”¹¹ The Peace Arch-Douglas Border Crossing off I-5 North in Blaine is one of the most popular of these land crossings. Blaine is a charming border town with a quaint downtown core where you can dine in a railway car, take a Sasquatch selfie, or grab fresh milk or ice cream from a local dairy. Its pleasant waterfront trails have stunning views of Mt. Baker and White Rock, B.C., part of metro Vancouver, which looms across the Salish Sea like the Emerald City in the Wizard of Oz . People who live in Blaine are salt-of-the-earth types who will stop to help a stranger with a flat tire and wait to leave until after the tow-truck arrives.

Border towns like Blaine have a personal investment in their Canadian neighbors. Many Blaine businesses rely on Canadian tourism; but beyond revenue, they consider Canadians to be their friends. Groups such as the Raging Grannies and Indivisible Bellingham (Bellingham is a large city adjacent to Blaine), have been holding pro-Canadian rallies at the Peace Arch since the Trump administration began targeting Canada with tariffs and annexation threats.

Though these rallies began with a handful of attendees, the frequency of them has quickly grown, as has the number of participants. On March 29th, for instance, well over a hundred Americans and Canadians gathered to affirm their bonds with one another and to commiserate about the damaging effects of policy changes towards Canada advanced by the Trump administration.

A handshake ritual was the culmination and highlight of the rally. Americans and Canadians lined up and faced each other like sports teams at the end of a game. The mood grew very emotional, with choked tears, hugs, and apologies as people moved down the line to personally greet one another.

A border may be a political and geographic terminus where one city, county, state, or country ends and another begins. But the camaraderie and caring amongst strangers at the rally demonstrated that human emotions of love, trust, and friendship transcend these boundaries. There was nothing fake or artificial in the mixed, raw emotions of outrage, dismay, shame, kinship, and apprehension displayed by both Americans and Canadians at the Peace Arch on March 29th. These reactions were a healthy response to policies deliberately designed to damage the harmony that exists among people on both sides of the border rather than to positively maintain their international bonds. To callously disregard the human element of a border in favor of territory demarcation and heightened security zones is to default on obligations of human rights and international stability. This approach wholly ignores the interdependence of borderlands and their potential as a resource for common good.

Works Cited

1. “Peace Arch Historical State Park History,” Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, last accessed March 2025, https://parks.wa.gov/about/news-center/field-guide-blog/peace-arch-historical-state-park-history.
2. Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, March 2025.
3. Paul Kuenker,”One Hundred Years of Peace: Memory and Rhetoric on the United States/Canadian Border 1920-1933,” University of New Mexico, last accessed March 2025, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/151582898.pdf.
4. Haley Chi-Sing, “Trump Downplays Canada’s Liberal Lean from Oval Office, Calls Border an ‘Artificial Line,’” Fox News, March 21, 2025, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-downplays-canadas-liberal-lean-from-oval-office-calls-border-artificial-line.
5. “USA-Canada Border Crossings,” Canada DUI Entry, 2025, https://www.canadaduientrylaw.com/border-crossings.php#:~:text=Washington%20State%20has%2013%20land,Lynden%20Aldengrove%2C%20and%20Sumas%20Huntingdon.
6. Marcus Baker, “Survey of the Northwest Boundary of the United States, 1857-1861,” Department of the Interior, 1900, p. 27, https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/0174/report.pdf.
7. William La Jeunesse, “Trump Admin Shares Border plans for 2025 and Beyond: ‘As Much Wall as We Need,’” MSN News, April 2, 2025, https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-admin-shares-border-plans-for-2025-and-beyond-as-much-wall-as-we-need/ar-AA1Cb1St?ocid=BingNewsSerp.
8. Beth Simmons, “International Borders: Yours, Mine and Ours,” University of Chicago Legal Forum, last accessed March 2025, https://legal-forum.uchicago.edu/print-archive/international-borders-yours-mine-and-ours.
9. Lanre Bakare, “Pink See-Saws Across US-Mexican Border Named Design of the year 2020,” January 18, 2021, Guardian News, https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/jan/19/pink-seesaws-across-us-mexico-border-named-design-of-the-year-2020.
10. Dumitiria Floria and Narcisa Gales, “Affirming the Principles of Good Neighborliness in International Relations,” Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty: Law, 8(2), p.4, doi:10.18662/lumenlaw/8.2/40.
11. Canada DUI Entry, 2025.

Additional Resources

https://www.historylink.org/File/9194

https://www.historylink.org/File/5224

https://www.peacearchnews.com/community/celebrating-sam-hill-and-the-peace-arch-2781215

https://bcparks.ca/peace-arch-park/#facilities

https://www.thenorthernlight.com/stories/multiple-rallies-scheduled-at-peace-arch,37671.

https://www.surreynowleader.com/news/reaffirming-friendship-hundreds-gather-at-peace-arch-to-show-solidarity-7898863

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other/americans-peace-arch-border-rally-protests-u-s-actions-we-never-want-to-see-these-gates-close/ar-AA1CmNDj?ocid=BingNewsSerp

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/treaty-of-ghent

Civics WaWa contains fact-based articles and videos dedicated to civics education in the Pacific Northwest (PNW) and beyond. WaWa references the state of Washington. However, it also refers to the word wawa, which means speech in Chinook Jargon, a trade language once spoken ubiquitously throughout the region. Citizens in a healthy democracy engage in civil, civic participation and dialogue. Having a common language for understanding civic principles, therefore, is of utmost importance.

This site will serve as an encyclopedia of civics words. It will unpack the denotations, or literal definitions of words, while providing an historical context for them that is unique to the PNW.

Since language is easily politicized it behooves every citizen to reflect upon the buzz words of our time and decide how these words fit into personal beliefs and value systems. Pondering the connotations of civics words, how they strike us as either positive, negative, or neutral, and why that might be, is a useful exercise.

As you wander through this site, feel free to agree or disagree with the ruminations. Examine the references provided, as each post is faithfully researched.

Land acknowledgement: Though this website exists in the Cloud (sahale smok or “the smoke from above” in Chinook Jargon), the human minds behind it acknowledge that they live on Coast Salish tribal land.