Do Something

Speak, vote, and act to preserve your rights

We elect representatives to act in our interests. Find out who your state and federal representatives are and demand action to protect your human rights. 

Make sure you are registered to vote and cast your ballot! The general election is on Tuesday, November 8. Here is everything you need to know about how to vote!

Citizens have the power to engage, reform, and act. Here are some of the ways you can help strengthen our democracy.


Get Informed

Primary source material for the concerned citizen

The Constitution of the United States is required reading for every citizen. You can’t make informed choices or debate if you don’t know what it says.

Visit the National Constitution Center right here in Philadelphia to learn everything you need to know about the document that frames our democracy.

Do you want to know what the founding fathers actually thought? Read it in their own words. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison wrote 85 essays lobbying New York state to ratify the Constitution. Known as the Federalist Papers, these essays provide context and clarity on the political ideas of these men at the time of our nation’s unsteady inception. You can read the full text of these writings here.

If you ever wanted to be a fly on the wall at Independence Hall in the summer of 1787, you don’t have to pretend. The transcript of those proceedings, recorded by the official secretary participants including James Madison, are available to the public.

Get Involved

Your toolkit for effective citizenship

One of the founding tenets of The Philadelphia Citizen is to get people the resources they need to become better, more engaged citizens of their city.

We hope to do that in our Good Citizenship Toolkit, which includes a host of ways to get involved in Philadelphia—whether you want to contact your City Councilmember to voice your concerns about the issues impacting your community, get those experiencing homelessness the goods they need, or simply go out to dinner somewhere where you know your money is going toward a greater good.

Find an issue that’s important to you in the list below, and get started on your journey of A-plus citizenship.

Vote and strengthen democracy

Stand up for marginalized communities

Create a cleaner, greener Philadelphia

Help our local youth and schools succeed

Support local businesses

Guest Commentary: Guns, Abortion and the Folly of Originalism

The Supreme Court decisions on abortion and handguns are more informed by Humpty Dumpty than by sophisticated legal reasoning

Guest Commentary: Guns, Abortion and the Folly of Originalism

The Supreme Court decisions on abortion and handguns are more informed by Humpty Dumpty than by sophisticated legal reasoning

Last week the United States Supreme Court rendered decisions on two of the most controversial and consequential issues in the last 50 years. It decided that the United States Constitution did not explicitly give a woman the right to have an abortion, and that it also prohibited the states from placing certain restrictions on the public carrying of handguns for self-defense.

It concluded that since the word abortion is not in the Constitution, only the individual states can legislate on the question of whether and under what circumstances abortions could be permitted. And, because the “right to bear arms” is found in the Second Amendment, the states have very limited power to restrict the right of every American to carry a handgun in public.

The “living constitution” approach … argues that the court should take into consideration modern day conditions and circumstances in determining what the language of the Constitution means and how it should be interpreted and applied.

These decisions utilize an “originalist” or “literalist” theory of constitutional interpretation. That is, in deciding constitutional questions, the Court is bound by the intentions, contemporary understandings and worldviews of the “Founding Fathers” who drafted the Constitution and Ten Amendments in 1787 and 1791.

Remember that these were all wealthy White men, mostly farmers who enslaved humans and lacked formal education. And they excluded women, Blacks, and indigenous people from the document altogether — and by its literal terms preserved racial inequality and slavery.

There were 13 states in 1791 and a largely rural and agrarian population of four million, of whom 700,000 were enslaved. There was no internet, no televisions, few newspapers, no telephones, automobiles, highway systems, railroads, or large cities — and most of the country was illiterate. There was no organized military and no police departments. Most scientific knowledge, and medicine in particular, were primitive at best. There were very few medical schools, few formally trained doctors, no antibiotics, curative drugs, anesthesia, X-rays, and no reliable techniques for the diagnosis and treatment of most illnesses.

The “arms” of the Founding Fathers’ day, the carrying of which the majority considers to be sacrosanct, consisted of highly inaccurate, single-shot flintlock handguns and long rifles. The revolver which allowed the discharge of multiple rounds was not invented until 1835. There were no automatic or semiautomatic handguns or assault rifles with large capacity magazines capable of firing hundreds of rounds in a matter of seconds at targets 300 yards away — they were not and are not used for self-defense.

The majority of the Court believes that this country, with 50 states and 332 million people of different races, ethnicities, cultures, religions, and traditions, is bound in perpetuity by what those men understood and intended 231 years ago.

Those men, who revolted against British tyranny to gain political rights, individual freedom and personal autonomy, would be repulsed at the notion that states have the right to determine what a woman does with her body. And if they had a shred of decency, they would be horrified at the mass carnage regularly caused by the proliferation of semiautomatic handguns and high-capacity assault weapons.

They will continue to be the “master” of the Constitution and deprive us of other “rights” that we have taken for granted unless we vote to take control of both houses of Congress this November and the presidency in 2024.

The approach of the conservative majority on the Court as to what is or is not protected by the literal words of the Constitution is akin to Humpty Dumpty’s claim to Alice in Wonderland in Lewis Carroll’s Through The Looking Glass. Humpty says, “When I choose a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less … The question is who is to be the master, that’s all.”

The majority’s decisions in these cases are examples of bigoted, right-wing political ideology masquerading as objective and nonpartisan legal analysis. They get to play Humpty Dumpty with the Constitution because Mitch McConnell stole a seat on the Court from Barack Obama, and not enough of our kind voted for Hillary Clinton to give her an Electoral College victory over an ignorant, immoral insurrectionist in 2016.

They will continue to be the “master” of the Constitution and deprive us of other “rights” that we have taken for granted unless we vote to take control of both houses of Congress this November and the presidency in 2024. They will also decide who we love, who we marry, and whether we will be safe in places of worship, stores, classrooms, nightclubs and on the streets.

Elections really do have consequences: Some are deadly, some are demoralizing, and some last for generations. VOTE. VOTE. VOTE.

Carl Singley is of counsel at the Tucker Law Group and the former Dean of Temple Law School.

The Citizen welcomes guest commentary from community members who stipulate to the best of their ability that it is fact-based and non-defamatory.



1940 oil-on-canvas painting by Howard Chandler Christy, depicting the Constitutional Convention signing the U.S. Constitution at Independence Hall in Philadelphia on September 17, 1787. Howard Chandler Christy, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The Philadelphia Citizen will only publish thoughtful, civil comments. If your post is offensive, not only will we not publish it, we'll laugh at you while hitting delete.

Be a Citizen Editor

Suggest a Story

Advertising Terms

We do not accept political ads, issue advocacy ads, ads containing expletives, ads featuring photos of children without documented right of use, ads paid for by PACs, and other content deemed to be partisan or misaligned with our mission. The Philadelphia Citizen is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization and all affiliate content will be nonpartisan in nature. Advertisements are approved fully at The Citizen's discretion. Advertisements and sponsorships have different tax-deductible eligibility. For questions or clarification on these conditions, please contact Director of Sales & Philanthropy Kristin Long at [email protected] or call (609)-602-0145.