One question about the Constitution puts liberals’ appetite for sweeping change to the test
Fox News Digital interviewed several attendees at the March on Washington 2026: Defend the Vote who supported far-reaching political reforms, including rewriting the US Constitution and abolishing or restructuring the Senate. The article presents these views as evidence of support among some activists for more sweeping changes associated with democratic socialism, amid debate within the Democratic Party over its future direction.
The march, organised by Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network on the anniversary of the 1963 event, featured Democratic figures including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Hakeem Jeffries, Abigail Spanberger and Bernie Sanders. Interviewees cited universal healthcare, stronger unions, reducing money in politics and human rights as priorities; one Michigan attendee praised policies associated with New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, while a New Jersey worker said he had seen rapid positive change under his administration. The article also notes that Democratic Socialists of America-backed candidates have won several primary contests ahead of the midterms.
- Some march attendees backed rewriting core US political institutions.
- Interviewees highlighted healthcare, unions and campaign-finance reform.
- The article links these views to Democratic socialist electoral gains.
New here? Start with this
The US Constitution sets out how the federal government works and limits its powers. It divides authority among the president, Congress and the courts; Congress has two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate, where each state has equal representation.
Changing the Constitution requires approval by two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the states, or a convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures followed by ratification. The Senate can also be restructured through an amendment, though abolishing it would require changing the Constitution.
The Democratic Party includes people with different views on the role of government and the pace of reform. Democratic socialists generally support a larger public role in areas such as healthcare and stronger labour rights, while proposals to change political institutions raise questions about how power should be shared and how reforms could be made.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of sweeping reforms argue that institutions such as the Senate can give disproportionate weight to less populous states and obstruct policies backed by a national majority. They see constitutional change or restructuring as a democratic way to address that imbalance and make progress on healthcare, workers’ rights and the influence of money in politics.
The case against
Critics argue that the Constitution’s demanding amendment process and the Senate’s role in representing states help protect stability, federalism and minority interests from shifts in national majorities. They may support specific policy changes while warning that rewriting foundational rules or abolishing the Senate could weaken checks and balances and create uncertainty about what might replace them.