This panel gathers historians and also political scientists with diverse views on the Declaration of Independence and its legacy in America, who nonetheless share the view that during the America 250 period of commemorations, a renewal of broad American engagement with the founding text of all of modern democracy is an important element of understanding and also strengthening constitutional democracy in America and beyond. The panel will discuss differing views of the meaning of the Declaration and of its legacy in the United States, particularly its resonance in the 1770s and 1780s. The panel more generally addresses the proposition that during this period of America 250 commemorations and opportunities for civic education, within academia and beyond, the AHA should reprise its serious effort with the American Political Science Association (APSA) from the Bicentennial period forty years ago. That joint AHA-APSA effort was “Project ’87” – offering conference panels, and undertaking publishing efforts, on ideas and themes of the American founding era spanning the 1770s to the 1790s, to include their ongoing legacies in American and global politics. For this AHA panel in a historic city, early in the A250 commemorative period, two historians and two political scientists offer papers on the Declaration’s resonance in American life. Steven Sarson addresses the general effort to build America as a natural law republic securing the “Safety and Happiness” of the citizenry. Jane E. Calvert addresses the work of John Dickinson to realize the principles in the Declaration on protection of rights, and his influence on the Articles of Confederation. Paul Carrese addresses efforts to build state constitutions implementing the Declaration’s aims which substantially show the influence of a common-law constitutionalism and the tripartite separation of powers enunciated by Montesquieu. James Stoner addresses the particular understanding of the legislative power evident in the state constitutions from late 1775 onward, showing differing views of how to accord with the Declaration’s principle of consent of the governed – thus requiring new or refined conceptions of legislative power in the new republics of the new world. This blend of historians and political scientists offers a breadth and balance of perspectives and of approaches in engaging the Declaration and its legacy, thus a richer discussion for the AHA community; and hopefully offering a constructive foundation for renewal of the AHA-APSA collaboration a generation ago.