Daryl Joseffer
Executive Vice President and Chief Counsel, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Published
May 04, 2026
This article is part of a series: The Declaration of Independence: Principles We Defend
One of the fundamental values established by the Declaration of Independence is the right to political representation. The document, which laid the groundwork for the world’s leading democracy, directly opposed the Crown’s suppression of political participation. These ideals were not only reflected in numerous colonial documents predating the Declaration, but later became integral to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Preamble to the Declaration itself lays out that the legitimacy of government and its “just powers” derive from “the consent of the governed.” This principle has guided American law since the nation’s founding.
Throughout the Declaration, the list of grievances underscores the King’s repeated violations of the people’s right to participate in government through representation. The most evident violation was the abolition or limitation of colonial legislatures. The Declaration notes that the King’s representatives “dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly,” referring to royal governors’ disbanding colonial legislatures.
Similarly, the Declaration decries the ways in which the King undermined the effectiveness and accessibility of representative government without formally abolishing it. One grievance protests royal governors who relocated legislative bodies to “places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant” for “the sole purpose of fatiguing” legislators into compliance. Another faults the King for refusing to approve the division of colonial counties unless the new counties forfeited their right to representation, forcing colonists to choose between representative government and proximity to courts and other government offices.
The Litigation Center has consistently championed an open political process, strongly supporting the principle that Americans have a fundamental right to participate in government. Our briefs have defended Americans’ rights to speak on matters of public concern, voice their opinions, and attempt to persuade elected officials.
One of the Litigation Center’s earliest amicus briefs defended the right of businesses to speak on matters of public concern. In First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765 (1978), the Litigation Center urged the Supreme Court to strike down a Massachusetts law prohibiting corporate expenditures aimed at influencing voters on referenda unrelated to a corporation’s “material” interests. The Court reaffirmed that the “free discussion of governmental affairs” is essential to democratic decision-making and that this right applies equally to corporations and individuals. Id. at 777.
That principle has continued to guide our work. We’ve filed amicus briefs arguing that the First Amendment protects corporate speech in the political process. We’ve also defended free speech and representative government in our own lawsuits, challenging restrictions on corporate speech.
We have challenged laws designed to mute speech on matters of public concern, such as our Supreme Court victory over restrictions on speech about labor issues in Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, 554 U.S. 60 (2008) and a recent victory over a Maryland law that taxed companies but stopped them from informing customers about the tax, Chamber of Commerce v. Lierman, 151 F.4th 530 (4th Cir. 2025). The Fourth Circuit observed that protests against taxation have deep historical roots in America and that it was “outrage” over a novel Stamp tax that “prompted the colonists to begin developing the arguments that would later form the Declaration of Independence.”
By advocating for these principles in landmark cases and ongoing advocacy, the Litigation Center continues to reinforce the vital connection between speech, representation, and self-government. We stand ready to use our own speech and other advocacy to fight for those rights in the courts. America’s founding principle of political participation demands nothing less.
Read the Full Series:
About the authors
Daryl Joseffer
Daryl Joseffer is executive vice president and chief counsel at the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, the litigation arm of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In this role, Joseffer handles a variety of litigation matters for the Chamber. He has argued 12 cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and dozens of appeals in other courts across the country.
