Sample Chapters
from Tru North Uprising: A Reckoning for America
Welcome to a first look at Tru North Uprising — a timely political novel about a divided nation, a youth-led movement, and the quiet revolution already underway. Told through a chorus of voices, Tru North Uprising captures a country in conversation with itself amid a constitutional crisis and a call for freedom. These sample chapters introduce the spark behind the TruNorth movement and the bold proposal at its heart: The Freedom Initiative — a sweeping effort born in a rising wave of public outrage , civic disillusionment, defiance and hope that begins in Michigan and challenges the very structure of American democracy.
If the story resonates with you, I’d love to stay in touch.
Scroll down to read, or download the PDF.
And don’t forget to sign up for the newsletter for updates, bonus content, and behind-the-scenes glimpses as we approach launch.
The Conversation Starter
“Everything that I did in my life that was worthwhile I caught hell for.”
—Earl Warren (former Supreme Court Justice)
Lansing, Michigan Statehouse
At 10:02 a.m., she was recognized by the Speaker and walked to the lectern in the hearing room. Her fellow legislators murmured greetings, shuffled papers, checked devices. Business as usual. She tapped the mic.
“I know we’re here to discuss the budget backstop,” she began, her voice clear and steady. “But if I may—I’d like to speak, briefly, to something larger.” A few heads lifted.
“We are a diverse, but moderate state, with constituents on both sides of the aisle” she said. “And lately, I’ve heard more and more from my constituents asking a question that, even a year ago, would’ve sounded absurd.
“What if we didn’t have to endure this chaos? What if there was another way?” Now they were really listening.
“What if Michigan—through a peaceful, democratic process—chose to explore a new future? One aligned with our values. Our needs. Our hopes. What if, she paused . . . we considered joining our neighbors to the north?”
Silence. Then: someone laughed, soft and unsure. A chair creaked. Elena didn’t blink.
“I’m not proposing secession, not in the way you might think, but rather that we talk about it. A new way of looking at things. A conversation about options. Of Possibility. Of Hope. Of Change. Establishing our boundaries. Finding our bearings. Looking for true north.
“What I am proposing is a ballot measure, a Freedom Initiative, that would consider annexation to Canada. The measure would recommend removal of the current Administration, and call for amendments to the Constitution or a Constitutional Convention to occur within 180 days. If that does not occur, then Michigan’s Sovereignty Petition would become effective”. It was a moment that would be replayed on screens around the world by nightfall. The chamber erupted with shouts from the senators wearing red ties, and the shock on the faces of everyone else was self-evident.
That night, #TruNorth starts trending on social media. The next day, the question most asked on search engines, was “What is TruNorth?”
To Move a Mountain
“Because you are alive, everything is possible.”
— Thich Nhat Hanh
At the bar in the hotel lobby, Jonathan sits in the corner armchair and smiles as he sees Elena walk in. He gives her a hug and says: “You look fit, Elena, — fighting fit. That was quite a bombshell speech — the ultimate ultimatum!”
Impatiently, Jonathan asks “So, Elena, what the fuck are you doing?”
Elena takes a breath and simply says, “I’m trying to start a conversation.”
“That was a hell of a conversation starter,” Jonathan said cautiously, “You understand what you’re proposing? Secession? Annexation talks with Canada? That’s not just crazy, radical, and maybe not possible — it’s dangerous.”
“I know exactly what it is,” she said calmly. “But I’m trying to start a conversation that needs to happen quickly. The last amendment to the Constitution to be ratified took 200 years! Our country’s situation is much more urgent!”
He exhaled sharply. “Why now? Why not wait for the midterms? Why not try to fix it the traditional way?”
“Because the traditional way is broken,” she said, her voice tightening.
“They’ve gerrymandered, they’ve suppressed voters, they’ve packed courts, they’ve threatened the free press, they’re incessantly lying, they’re using the justice system as a weapon against the people, they are even re-writing history, they are dismantling our democracy before our very eyes. If we wait for the system to fix itself, that system won’t even exist.”
Jonathan stayed quiet, weighing her words.
Elena leaned in, her voice dropping lower but growing even more intense.
“I ask you this, Jonathan, how would you start a movement to unravel this mountain of crap?” she asked. He looked perplexed.
She continued, “Mountains are moved through the process of erosion. But erosion is usually slow, it takes a long time — persistent constant pressure that is sometimes gentle, but often fierce and cataclysmic. Like an earthquake, that undermines the mountain’s foundation. After a cataclysmic event, the rain, the rivers, the winds — they don’t just wear it down slowly. They tear it apart faster than anyone expects.”
She paused, letting the idea sink in.
“The Administration already shook the ground first, Elena said.
“The chaos of policies, threatening the press, destabilizing allies, ignoring the courts, trampling people’s rights, disrupting the markets - they caused the earthquake. And they continue to suck all the oxygen out of the room with their hairbrained tweets and executive orders. They are deliberately trying to divide us through distraction, fragmenting our efforts to fight back.”
She took another deep breath, and continued, softer, calmer. “We need focus and a coherent message that can be heard through all the noise.”
Jonathan didn’t answer right away. He wasn’t a fool — he knew she wasn’t wrong about the growing chaos, or about how fragile our democracy had become.
“But the threat of secession?” he repeated his question.
“It’s the conversation starter,” Elena said. “The proposed Sovereignty Petition is intended to be a lightning rod to grab the attention of the media and the American public and make it laser focused — not on what the Administration is doing, or tweeting, but on what WE are doing. I wanted to invoke the Declaration of Independence upon which this Country was formed. A reminder.
“It's a wake-up call.” Elena said, her voice steady now, almost quiet. “The Sovereignty Petition is not about running away—it’s a flare shot into the sky. People are exhausted, distracted, confused and numbed by the flood of chaos. We need something sharp enough to pierce the noise and bright enough to hold our attention.
“But El, you know them’s fighting words. And you’re picking a fight with the NADA base, the whole Neocon caucus, as well as, the Administration. It’s dangerous, you could get hurt, you could incite violence, if not a civil war.”
Elena holds up her hand, “I know, I know. It’s extreme, but what is happening with the Administration IS extreme. We need to cut through the noise. I am not going to go quiet into the dark night Jon. And I am certainly not going to stand by and watch our democracy disintegrate without putting up a fight. I’ve detonated an earthquake, on purpose, to move this mountain as quickly as possible. If we don’t act urgently, massively and immediately, if we don’t direct our energy to a single focal point, I truly believe our democracy is over.”
She looked down at her hands wrapped around the cup in her hand. The ceramic was still warm, grounding. But her fingers wouldn’t stop trembling. She tightened her grip until her knuckles whitened. For a moment, she wished she didn’t believe it—that she could unsee what she saw coming. But she couldn’t. And that was the burden. Knowing, and still choosing to speak it aloud.
She catches Jonathan’s eyes and holds them in her gaze. “I’m trying to send a message to the Administration, to our fellow Americans, to other states, and to the world that yells “Help us fix this!”
Jonathan reflects on her motivations for a long moment. As he glances across the lobby at the windows, he sees flashes of lightning, then a few seconds later the distant rumble of thunder. The moment shakes him to his core, he nods his head, and says: “And fired the shot heard round the world,” musing on Emerson’s phrase about the start of the Revolutionary War. Jonathan sighed heavily, the sound of a man realizing he stood at the edge of something historic — and terrifying.
“Will you write about it?” Elena asked, not pleading — simply offering the chance to participate in what could be America’s salvation.
“I’m in,” he promises, without hesitating. “You always were the instigator of mischief and hazardous adventures, El.”
As he gets up to leave, he placed a hand on her shoulder, a gesture of quiet reassurance—while a tangle of anxiety and excitement coiled beneath his ribs. And beneath it all, a flicker of something he hasn’t felt in a long time: hope.
The next day the headline over Jonathan’s by line in the Michigan Sentinel and the Collective Press read:
“REFRAME OR SECEDE?
Michigan’s Freedom Initiative Demands Constitutional Reckoning.”
Permission to Opt Out?
“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it…”
—Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, (1776)
SOVEREIGNTY PETITION ECHOES DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
By Jonathan Wordly, The Collective Press
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Following widespread reaction to Michigan Senator Elena Marceau’s address and the viral spread of the 'Freedom Initiative,' a youth-driven movement out of Michigan is igniting constitutional debate across the country challenging more than just federal leadership—it’s challenging the very structure of the Union itself. The petition—dubbed the Freedom Initiative—calls on Congress to take up sweeping reforms or permit the state to “opt out” of the Union.
The initiative, launched by the student-led TruNorth movement and backed publicly by Michigan State Senator Elena Marceau, demands that the Administration be removed, and that Congress consider proposed constitutional amendments or calls for convening a Constitutional Convention. If Congress fails to act, the petition requests that Michigan be allowed to pursue “independence and annexation to Canada, through peaceful and democratic means.”
The proposal, now gaining attention in statehouses and national media, has prompted mixed responses from legal scholars, politicians, and constitutional experts. While supporters claim the initiative is a legal and symbolic act of civic protest, critics argue it dangerously flirts with the boundaries of federal law and may incite a civil war.
“This is not about sedition or rebellion,” said Senator Marceau in a statement. “It is about updating our constitutional framework. We’re invoking the tools the Constitution gives us to fix a broken system—or begin a conversation about what comes next. As stated in the Declaration of Independence in 1776, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
Critics of the measure call it an act of sedition. However, Wilbur Burns of conservative think-tank The Federalist Foundation says: “Michigan’s petition requesting permission to opt out is in line with the 1869 Supreme Court case Texas v. White, that held that no state can unilaterally secede from the Union.” In that decision, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, writing for the majority, declared:
“The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.” The decision also allowed that secession could only occur with the consent of both the state and the federal government, a point that some advocates of the Freedom Initiative are now leaning on. “They’re not declaring war, nor rebellion” said Miriam Rathwell, a constitutional law professor at the University of Michigan. “They’re asking Congress to consider amending the Constitution—and if not, then grant permission to opt-out. That distinction matters.”
Critics on the right, however, have denounced the proposal as reckless. “This is a dangerous game,” said Rep. Clay Waller (R-KS), appearing on Knox News Now. “We’ve got kids waving upside-down flags and throwing around words like ‘freedom’ and ‘sovereignty’—this isn’t civic discourse, it’s political cosplay.” He went on to describe the petition as “a left-wing stunt dressed up in Founding Father drag.”
Still, not all conservatives oppose the broader idea of a constitutional convention. Some have long supported the idea as a vehicle for instituting a balanced budget amendment, and lately, the NADA groups are calling for a convention to eliminate the term limits on the Presidency. They not only want a third term, but some groups believe the Administration’s term should be extended indefinitely.
“This country needs a Con-Con,” said former Utah Governor Brent Mahoney, a leading figure in the Convention of States Project. “If this movement forces Congress to finally act, well… strange bedfellows make good politics sometimes.”
Democratic leaders have been more measured in their responses. Senate Minority Whip Alicia Benet (D-MA) said on Tuesday, “The impulse here is understandable. This Administration has tested every boundary of the Constitution, and the people are responding. But let’s not confuse a cry for help with a call for disunion.”
The Freedom Initiative’s, Sovereignty Petition, circulating online and on paper across Michigan, falls short of declaring independence. It does not claim legal authority to sever ties with the federal government. Instead, its organizers framed it as a request—a big political ask of Congress and a lightning rod for the country. The Initiative is framed as a request, because the Supreme Court has ruled that states cannot secede unilaterally, but that secession could legally occur through mutual agreement to separate. In the meantime, TruNorth volunteers have begun gathering signatures statewide, while national protests and rallies continue to grow under the banners of opposition to the Administration’s policies.
“We’re not asking to break the Union,” said student organizer Mia Coleman, interviewed at a protest in Ann Arbor. “We’re saying: do your job, or let us find another way.” As the movement spreads, political analysts warn that the stakes—legal, political, and cultural—are real.
“This is no longer just about Michigan,” said political historian Dr. Kenneth Osei of Howard University. “It’s a reckoning with how fractured our system has become—and whether it can still evolve from within.”
Most Americans can quote the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident…”— and many Americans recall that all men are created equal; that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. But fewer, remember the rest of the Preamble — that Governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed; and, that whenever a form of government becomes destructive of these ends, “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it”.
The Declaration of Independence signed by the original thirteen colonies in 1776, was, at its core, a rejection of authoritarianism. It was started as a protest about taxation without representation, with the infamous Tea Party. It was also a bold expression of unity among colonies with vastly different interests. Today, the Freedom Initiative/Sovereignty Petition revives that legacy, not necessarily by breaking from the Union, but by calling on the states to convene and clarify the meaning of liberty in our time, or grant permission to seek safety and happiness elsewhere.