“There’s a very good case to be made, I think, that we were really founded in 1965,” presidential historian Jon Meacham said on MS NOW, arguing that the United States only became a multiracial, multiethnic democracy after mid-20th century reforms. The claim—summarized here as the Jon Meacham 1965 founding claim—reframes the nation’s origins as a longer, contested process rather than a single 18th-century moment.
“We’re really about 60 years old, and we’re a developing democracy in a lot of ways.” — Jon Meacham, MS NOW
Meacham made the comment as the country approaches its 250th anniversary, linking the idea of America’s founding to later laws that expanded who could fully participate in civic life. His remarks prompted debate about how to commemorate July 4 and how to interpret the arc of U.S. history ahead of milestone celebrations.
Jon Meacham 1965 founding claim
In the MS NOW appearance, Meacham acknowledged the 18th-century Declaration of Independence and Constitution as the legal birth of the republic but emphasized that those documents did not immediately create a fully inclusive polity. The Jon Meacham 1965 founding claim positions the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 as turning points that meaningfully broadened who could claim membership in American democracy.
Meacham’s argument rests on the distinction between the creation of constitutional institutions and the later legal and social expansions that made those institutions more representative. For Meacham, 1965 marks a moment when the electorate and the nation’s demographic composition shifted in ways that more closely aligned practice with the founding ideals.
How 1965 laws changed voting and immigration
Meacham cited two landmark statutes as central to his claim: the Voting Rights Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 aimed to eliminate practices such as literacy tests and poll taxes that had been used to prevent Black Americans and other racial minorities from voting, particularly in parts of the South. By strengthening federal oversight and enforcement, the law helped increase registration and participation among previously disenfranchised communities.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 abolished the national-origins quota system that had heavily favored immigrants from Western Europe. That legislation opened the door to increased immigration from Asia, Africa and Latin America, reshaping the country’s ethnic and racial makeup over subsequent decades. Meacham argued these legal changes together expanded both the electorate and the population that democratic institutions were meant to serve.
Scholars routinely treat the 1960s civil-rights legislation and the 1965 immigration law as major milestones in expanding political and civic inclusion. At the same time, historians and social scientists note that legislation alone did not instantly erase discrimination or inequality; social change progressed unevenly across regions and institutions.
Public reactions from Sharpton and Joy Reid
Meacham’s comments arrived amid broader public conversations about national memory and commemoration. Rev. Al Sharpton has voiced that celebrating the nation’s 250th birthday felt wrong to many Black Americans because the legacy of slavery and ongoing racial injustice complicate celebratory narratives tied to 1776. Public commentators like Joy Reid have emphasized Juneteenth and emancipation anniversaries as more resonant milestone dates for Black Americans, arguing that the end of slavery and subsequent civil-rights gains better mark the arc toward fuller civic inclusion.
Those reactions highlight why Meacham’s 1965 framing drew attention: it aligns commemoration with milestones in legal equality and demographic change rather than solely with 18th-century constitutional acts.
What historians and critics note
Historians stress that Meacham’s statement is interpretive, not definitive. Whether one dates a nation’s founding to 1776, 1789, Reconstruction or mid-20th-century reforms depends on the criteria used—constitutional creation, revolutionary founding, or the achievement of broad legal and social inclusion. Many scholars point out that the process of expanding rights was gradual and involved multiple legal and political phases, including the Reconstruction amendments, New Deal shifts, civil-rights laws and later judicial decisions.
Critics also note that Meacham is a prominent public intellectual who has worked as a speechwriter for President Joe Biden. That professional background is part of his public profile and is cited by observers evaluating his commentary; it contextualizes rather than negates the historical argument he offered.
Brief history note
The Declaration of Independence and Constitution established the institutions of the United States in the late 18th century, but large portions of the population—enslaved people, many women, Native Americans and others—were denied full civic rights for generations. Over time, constitutional amendments, federal legislation and social movements incrementally broadened citizenship and participation. Meacham’s framing—placing a renewed founding in 1965—aims to highlight that long, contested process by which legal and social reforms reshaped American democracy.
Why it matters
How Americans date their founding affects national commemoration and civic education. A framing that centers 1965 draws attention to civil-rights victories and immigration reforms that expanded participation; a framing anchored in the 18th century emphasizes revolutionary origins and constitutional principles. The choice influences public ceremonies, school curricula and debates about which moments are remembered and why.
Source attribution
This report is based on Meacham’s appearance on MS NOW and a Fox News write-up of that segment. Original reporting: Fox News, “America wasn’t ‘really founded’ until 1965, MS NOW guest historian argues ahead of 250th birthday” (https://www.foxnews.com/media/america-wasnt-really-founded-until-1965-ms-now-guest-historian-argues-ahead-250th-birthday). The MS NOW segment and discussion are available from the program page on MSNBC (https://www.msnbc.com/ms-now). Additional context comes from public comments by Rev. Al Sharpton and Joy Reid referenced in coverage of the debate.
Readers can consult the Fox News item for the original report and links to the MS NOW discussion.
