In a June 2023 essay entitled “Civics: Who Will Teach Them?,” U.S. District Judge Curtis L. Collier of the Eastern District of Tennessee made the following statement about the critical importance of effective civics education for all U.S. citizens: “An important component of being a good citizen is being an informed and knowledgeable citizen. That means having a working knowledge of how our government is structured, how it functions, the role of the different branches of government, their separate powers, the branches’ responsibilities and the limitations on their powers. Without such knowledge, it is nearly impossible for us to fulfill our duties or wisely exercise our privileges as citizens.”

I agree with Judge Collier and remain convinced we have to continue to place emphasis on civic education. Thomas Jefferson, the third U.S. president, reached this same conclusion when he said, “An informed citizenry is at the heart of a dynamic democracy.”

As you may recall from history, when Benjamin Franklin, who was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, was once asked what type of government the Constitutional Convention adopted, his cautionary response was, “A republic, if you can keep it.” I think Benjamin Franklin was giving us a warning that to maintain a republic, its principles must be understood and intentionally passed along to each succeeding generation.

One of the main principles supporting our republic is our adherence to the strong conviction that we are a country that is ruled by duly enacted laws and not by the whims of men or women. The shorthand expression for this idea is that our nation supports the rule of law.

While this sounds commendable, the question is do we all have a shared understanding of what it means to say we support the rule of law? The phrase is used widely in the media, by our elected officials and members of the general public. But I am not persuaded that when we enter into a discussion about the state of the rule of law in our country, we all define this concept the same way.

I believe we are in an important teachable moment where lawyers can lead the way to making sure our fellow citizens have a productive understanding of what it means to say we are a country that supports the rule of law.

I would offer for your consideration the definition of the rule of law developed by the World Justice Project. For those of you who are not familiar with this organization, the World Justice Project is an independent, nonprofit, multidisciplinary organization that has for nearly 20 years been working to create knowledge, build awareness and stimulate action to advance the rule of law here at home and worldwide. Its founders and current board members include some of the leading lawyers in the U.S. and from other countries.

The following is the definition of the rule of law that has been developed and adopted by the World Justice Project: “The rule of law is a durable system of laws, institutions, norms and community commitment that delivers four universal principles: (1) accountability, (2) just law, (3) open government and (4) accessible and impartial justice.”

So what do these four principles really mean?

  • First, accountability: The government, as well as private actors, are accountable under the law.

  • When we say “just law”: The law is clear, publicized and stable and is applied evenly. It ensures human rights, as well as rights that are important to the business community, such as property, contract and procedural rights.

  • In terms of “open government”: The processes by which the law is adopted, administered, adjudicated and enforced are accessible, fair and efficient.

  • And finally, accessible and impartial justice: Justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical and independent representatives and neutrals who are themselves accessible, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.

What I would emphasize about these four principles of the rule of law that form the definition of the rule of law used by the World Justice Project is that these universal principles are not partisan principles. They are mainstream American principles that, when explained, I would expect would garner widespread acceptance and support among most audiences.

I believe we will be able to better judge what is or is not consistent with the rule of law if we start our analysis using a shared definition of this critical pillar on which our society is built.

My charge to myself and to my colleagues in the legal profession is to seek opportunities to have meaningful conversations with our work colleagues, our neighbors and our family members about what is their understanding of the rule of law. I am confident those conversations will be more impactful if they are based on a shared conceptual framework around what is meant by the rule of law.

As the leadership of the World Justice Project reminds us, no matter who we are or where we live in this country, the rule of law affects us all. It is the foundation for communities of justice, opportunity and peace. The rule of law underpins economic development, accountable government and respect for fundamental human rights, all of which we want for ourselves and for those who will follow us.

Michael E. Flowers is a member of Steptoe & Johnson, where he practices general corporate and commercial real estate law within the law firm’s business law department. He is also the firm’s director of diversity and inclusion. Flowers is a former chair of the ABA Business Law Section and a former member of the ABA Board of Governors and the Ohio State Bar Association’s board of governors. He currently serves on the ABA Cornerstones of Democracy Commission and is a member of the ABA House of Delegates representing the Ohio State Bar Association.

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.