-Official-Seal.png)
The Third Continental Congress
2026
Symbolic Public Session: July 4, 2026 (Commemorative, Not Governmental)
Ceremonial and public-facing activities will be conducted online and, optionally, in person.
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” - Anonymous
Overview
The Third Continental Congress is a symbolic, voluntary, citizen-organized civic initiative of The Continental Congress Project, LLC™, a private single-member for-profit organization lawfully engaged in partisan expression, political commentary, civic education, and commercial activity protected under the First Amendment. It is not a governmental body and does not claim public authority, legislative power, or representation of any official institution. Participation is open to all—citizens and non-citizens alike—who wish to study, debate, and practice democratic engagement, including public understanding of direct democracy mechanisms in the 26 initiative-referendum states and Washington, D.C.
I. Agenda
The purpose of the Third Continental Congress is to expand civic understanding, encourage lawful self-governance, strengthen democratic participation, and prepare public engagement for Project 2026—the 250th anniversary of the United States. It supports the growth of direct democracy where legally available, promotes liberty and equality, and stands in peaceful solidarity with the No Kings Movement against authoritarianism, bigotry, and concentrated power. Our work affirms that sovereignty originates with the people and is exercised through voluntary civic participation—not imposed authority.
II. Citizens
Since 1776, the United States has empowered its citizens—known and unknown—to shape the future through civic courage, discussion, and shared responsibility. While no modern structure mirrors pure direct democracy, 26 states and Washington, D.C. grant citizens authority to introduce or approve policy through initiative and referendum systems. Citizens aligned with the Civic Congress may lawfully collaborate across state lines, share research, draft proposals, and engage in public advocacy, provided all activities comply with applicable election and initiative laws. Participation is symbolic and educational, not legislative or binding, and confers no governmental authority or obligation.
III. 26 Direct Democracy States & Washington D.C.
Alaska provides citizens the ability to directly participate in lawmaking through the Statutory Initiative (indirect) and Veto Referendum processes. The statutory initiative allows citizens to propose new state laws or amendments to existing laws by collecting signatures to place the measure on the ballot; however, the Alaska Legislature can review and act on the proposed law before it reaches voters, which is why it’s considered “indirect.” The veto referendum permits citizens to challenge laws passed by the Legislature by collecting signatures to place the law on a statewide ballot for voter approval or rejection. Both processes are constitutionally protected mechanisms enabling Alaskans to exercise direct influence over state legislation.
Arizona empowers its citizens to participate directly in the lawmaking process through both Constitutional and Statutory Initiatives as well as the Veto Referendum. The constitutional initiative allows voters to propose amendments to the state constitution, while the statutory initiative enables the proposal of new laws or changes to existing laws. Both initiatives require the collection of a specified number of signatures to qualify measures for the ballot. The veto referendum gives citizens the ability to challenge laws passed by the Arizona Legislature, allowing voters to approve or reject a law before it takes effect. These tools provide Arizonans with a formal, legally recognized way to shape their state government directly, supplementing the representative process.
Arkansas allows citizens to engage in the democratic process through both Constitutional and Statutory Initiatives and the Veto Referendum. The constitutional initiative enables voters to propose amendments to the state constitution, while the statutory initiative allows citizens to propose new laws or changes to existing state statutes. Both types of initiatives require the collection of a legally specified number of signatures to qualify for the ballot. The veto referendum gives citizens the power to challenge and potentially overturn laws passed by the Arkansas Legislature before they take effect. These mechanisms provide Arkansans with a direct, legally protected way to influence their government, complementing the state’s representative democracy.
California is widely recognized for its robust direct democracy system, which includes Constitutional and Statutory Initiatives and the Veto Referendum. In 1911, California adopted Proposition 7, a landmark Progressive Era reform that amended the state constitution to establish both the initiative and optional referendum, granting citizens the power to propose and directly approve new laws or constitutional amendments. Continuing this participatory tradition, the unincorporated community of Altadena has maintained its Altadena Town Council since 1975, a locally elected volunteer civic body providing residents with a direct voice in county governance. Though advisory and non-legislative, the Council serves as a living model of community-based direct democracy within California’s broader constitutional framework, demonstrating how citizen participation continues to shape local self-governance more than a century after Proposition 7. Citizens may propose new laws or constitutional amendments by collecting the required number of signatures to place measures on the ballot, while the veto referendum allows voters to approve or reject laws passed by the state legislature before they take effect. These tools empower Californians to exercise a legally protected, direct voice in shaping state policies. California’s innovative citizen-led governance, combined with its economic, technological, and cultural strengths, has helped make it the largest state economy in the United States, with an output comparable to that of a medium-sized independent country, illustrating the potential impact of engaged, participatory civic processes.
Colorado provides citizens with strong direct democracy rights through Constitutional and Statutory Initiatives and the Veto Referendum. Residents can propose new state laws or constitutional amendments by collecting a required number of signatures to qualify measures for the ballot. The veto referendum empowers voters to approve or reject legislation passed by the state legislature before it becomes law. These mechanisms give Coloradans the ability to participate directly in shaping state policy, reinforcing the principle that lawmaking authority ultimately resides with the people.
Residents of the District of Columbia have access to Constitutional and Statutory Initiatives as well as the Veto Referendum, giving them tools for direct participation in lawmaking. Citizens may propose legislation or amendments to local laws and, upon gathering sufficient signatures, place these proposals on the ballot for a public vote. Additionally, the veto referendum allows voters to approve or reject laws passed by the local government before they take effect. These mechanisms ensure that residents of D.C. can exercise direct influence over local governance and policies.
In Florida, citizens have access to the Constitutional Initiative process, which allows the public to propose amendments to the state constitution. Through this process, Floridians can gather the required number of signatures to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot for a statewide vote. Florida does not provide a statutory initiative or veto referendum at the state level, meaning that citizen-driven proposals are limited to constitutional changes rather than ordinary legislation. This process empowers voters to directly shape the foundational legal framework of the state.
In Idaho, citizens may engage in Statutory Initiatives and Veto Referenda. The Statutory Initiative allows voters to propose new state laws or amendments to existing laws by collecting a required number of signatures to place the measure on the ballot for a public vote. The Veto Referendum empowers citizens to challenge laws passed by the state legislature; if enough valid signatures are collected, the law is suspended pending a statewide vote, allowing voters to approve or reject it. This dual mechanism ensures that Idahoans have direct influence over both the creation and potential repeal of state legislation.
In Illinois, citizens may use a limited Constitutional Initiative process. This allows voters to propose amendments to the state constitution by collecting the requisite number of signatures to place the measure on the ballot. While Illinois does not have a general statutory initiative process or statewide veto referendum, the constitutional initiative ensures that residents retain a direct voice in amending the foundational legal framework of the state, providing a formal avenue for citizen-led governance reforms.
In Maine, citizens can engage in statutory initiatives (indirect) and veto referenda. The statutory initiative process allows residents to propose new laws or amendments to existing statutes by submitting petitions with the required number of signatures; these measures are first reviewed and potentially revised by the legislature before appearing on the ballot. The veto referendum enables citizens to challenge laws recently passed by the legislature, allowing voters to approve or reject them directly. These mechanisms ensure that Maine residents have a meaningful, constitutionally supported role in shaping state law through direct democracy.
In Maryland, citizens have access only to the veto referendum as a direct democracy tool. This process allows voters to challenge recently passed legislation by the state legislature, effectively giving the electorate the power to approve or reject the law through a public vote. Maryland does not provide citizens the ability to propose new statutory or constitutional initiatives; the veto referendum remains the primary mechanism for direct citizen participation in shaping state law.
Massachusetts provides citizens with both constitutional and statutory initiatives, but only through an indirect process, as well as a veto referendum. The indirect initiative requires proposed measures to first be submitted to the state legislature, which may enact, modify, or reject them before they can appear on the ballot for a public vote. The veto referendum allows voters to challenge recently passed legislation, giving the electorate the authority to approve or reject laws enacted by the legislature. These mechanisms reflect the state’s historical commitment to citizen participation while maintaining legislative oversight.
Michigan allows citizens to propose laws through a constitutional initiative and an indirect statutory initiative, as well as to challenge recently enacted legislation through a veto referendum. The constitutional initiative enables voters to directly propose amendments to the state constitution, requiring signatures to qualify for the ballot. The statutory initiative (indirect) requires proposed laws to first be submitted to the legislature, which may adopt, reject, or modify them before they proceed to a public vote. The veto referendum gives citizens the power to approve or reject laws recently passed by the legislature. Together, these tools provide Michiganders with multiple avenues for direct participation in governance.
Mississippi technically provides for a constitutional initiative, allowing citizens to propose amendments to the state constitution. However, in practice, this process is functionally inoperative due to legal and procedural restrictions related to districting and signature requirements. As a result, while the law exists, citizens currently do not have a practical mechanism to place constitutional initiatives on the ballot. Mississippi does not provide statutory initiatives or veto referenda.
Missouri citizens have the right to participate in both constitutional and statutory initiatives, allowing them to propose amendments to the state constitution or create/repeal state laws through a direct vote. In addition, Missouri provides for a veto referendum, enabling citizens to approve or reject laws passed by the state legislature. These mechanisms ensure that Missouri residents can actively engage in shaping state policy and constitutional provisions through lawful, direct-democracy processes.
In Montana, citizens have the right to engage in constitutional and statutory initiatives, allowing them to propose amendments to the state constitution or enact new laws directly through popular vote. Additionally, Montana provides for a veto referendum, enabling voters to approve or reject legislation passed by the state legislature. These processes empower Montana residents to actively participate in shaping state governance and policy through lawful, citizen-led direct democracy actions.
In Nebraska, citizens are empowered with both constitutional and statutory initiatives, allowing them to propose amendments to the state constitution or enact new laws directly through voter approval. The state also provides for a veto referendum, giving voters the ability to reject legislation passed by the Nebraska Legislature. These mechanisms make Nebraska one of the states where direct citizen participation in lawmaking is legally recognized, ensuring that residents can exercise their rights to influence state governance through structured, lawful direct democracy processes.
Nevada grants its citizens the power to participate in both constitutional and statutory initiatives, although statutory initiatives are conducted indirectly through the legislature. Voters can also utilize the veto referendum to reject laws passed by the state legislature. These direct democracy tools provide Nevadans with legally recognized avenues to propose, approve, or repeal legislation, ensuring that citizen participation is an integral part of the state’s legislative process.
In New Mexico, citizens have access to the veto referendum only, allowing them to challenge and potentially reject laws passed by the state legislature through a statewide vote. The state does not provide constitutional or statutory initiative powers, meaning citizens cannot directly propose new laws or amendments. This mechanism ensures that residents maintain a measure of oversight over legislative actions, preserving the principle of participatory governance.
North Dakota provides citizens with both constitutional and statutory initiative powers, allowing voters to propose and enact new laws or constitutional amendments directly, bypassing the legislature. In addition, the state offers a veto referendum, enabling citizens to approve or reject laws already passed by the legislature. These mechanisms collectively empower North Dakota residents to actively participate in shaping state policy and maintaining accountability in governance.
Ohio grants its citizens the ability to engage in constitutional initiatives, permitting voters to propose amendments to the state constitution through a petition and ballot process. Additionally, Ohio provides for statutory initiatives (indirect), where proposed laws must first be submitted to the legislature for consideration before potentially appearing on the ballot. Ohio also allows for a veto referendum, giving voters the power to approve or reject laws passed by the legislature. These tools of direct democracy enable Ohioans to directly influence state law and constitutional provisions.
Oklahoma provides citizens with the ability to participate in constitutional initiatives, allowing voters to propose amendments to the state constitution through petition and ballot procedures. The state also allows statutory initiatives, enabling citizens to propose new laws or amendments to existing laws, which may be submitted to the legislature for consideration or placed directly on the ballot depending on the process. Additionally, Oklahoma permits a veto referendum, allowing voters to approve or reject legislation passed by the state legislature. These mechanisms give Oklahomans a direct role in shaping state law and policy.
Oregon is a pioneer in direct democracy, offering robust citizen participation mechanisms. The state allows both constitutional and statutory initiatives, enabling citizens to propose amendments to the state constitution or new laws through petition and ballot approval. Oregon also provides for a veto referendum, allowing voters to approve or reject legislation passed by the state legislature. The state’s direct democracy system, often called the "Oregon System," has served as a model for other states and ensures that citizens have a meaningful, legally protected voice in the lawmaking process.
South Dakota provides citizens with extensive direct democracy tools. The state allows both constitutional and statutory initiatives, empowering voters to propose and enact amendments to the state constitution or pass new laws directly through the ballot. Additionally, South Dakota offers a veto referendum, enabling voters to approve or reject legislation passed by the state legislature before it becomes law. These mechanisms are enshrined in the state constitution and statutes, giving South Dakotans a legally protected role in shaping state policy and ensuring active citizen participation in governance.
Utah provides citizens with direct democracy mechanisms primarily through statutory initiatives, which can be either direct or indirect. Through these processes, voters may propose new state laws or amendments to existing statutes and, depending on the procedure, either submit them directly to the ballot (direct) or first present them to the legislature for consideration before potential ballot placement (indirect). Additionally, Utah allows a veto referendum, enabling citizens to challenge recently passed legislation by collecting signatures to place the law on a statewide ballot for voter approval or rejection. These legal provisions are established under the Utah Constitution and state law, ensuring that citizens have a protected avenue to participate actively in the legislative process.
Washington State empowers its citizens with direct democracy tools including statutory initiatives (both direct and indirect) and the veto referendum. Through the direct initiative, voters can propose legislation that, if it meets signature requirements, goes straight to the ballot for a public vote. The indirect initiative first requires submission to the legislature, which may enact, amend, or reject the proposal; if the legislature does not adopt it, the measure proceeds to the ballot. The veto referendum allows citizens to challenge recently passed laws by collecting signatures to place the legislation before voters for approval or rejection. These mechanisms are grounded in the Washington State Constitution and statutes, enabling citizens to actively participate in the lawmaking process outside the representative legislature.
Wyoming provides limited direct democracy mechanisms at the state level, including the statutory initiative (indirect) and the veto referendum. Under the indirect initiative, citizens may propose legislation by gathering the required number of signatures; the proposed law is first submitted to the state legislature, which may enact, amend, or reject it. If the legislature does not pass the measure, it may then be placed on the ballot for a public vote. The veto referendum allows voters to challenge legislation passed by the Wyoming Legislature by collecting signatures to refer the law to the ballot, where voters may approve or reject it. These processes are governed by Wyoming state law and provide citizens a constitutional avenue to influence legislation outside of the regular legislative process.