On June 14, 2025, Los Angeles held the largest “No Kings” rally yet. This event happened to fall on former President Donald Trump’s birthday, and the same day as a parade celebrating the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. These protests seared the fleeting images into the public consciousness as never before. They ignited outrage at their meaning for American democracy, making them some of the largest, single-day demonstrations ever registered.
Ezra Levin, co-founder of Indivisible, put an exclamation point on that turnout. He continued, don’t think that a one-day protest is going to make any of this happen. He stated, “We’re not going to win if a lot of people show up at a protest one day.” His comments express a deep yearning among organizers for more sustained engagement rather than one-off events.
The “No Kings” protests highlighted a growing movement against perceived authoritarianism, attracting thousands of participants across various cities. To scholar of social movements Omar Wasow, the impact of this protest can’t be understated. He thinks it has the potential to be the largest single-day protest in history. This claim rings true on the eve of historic anniversaries. Both the March on Washington in 1963, with up to 500,000 participants, and the first Earth Day demonstrations in 1970, with 20 million estimated participants, were astonishingly large protests.
Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan formalized the 3.5% rule in their 2011 book, “Why Civil Resistance Works.” This idea is at the heart of the tactical genius of winning movements. Her research compared 323 nonviolent and violent revolutionary campaigns from 1900–2006. They found that nonviolent movements, with the active support of a minimum of 3.5% of the population, never fail to produce the change they seek.
G Elliott Morris, a political analyst, discussed the implications of this rule, stating, “The 3.5% rule is descriptive, not prescriptive and has been revised significantly since being originally published to allow for exceptions.” He added that current population trends complicate efforts to calculate the precise effect of protests. In contradistinction, the “No Kings” demonstration raises some important nuances that are difficult to quantify.
Protest planners and academic researchers alike are continuing the effort to establish precise turnout numbers. As UMass political scientist Jeremy Pressman told Vox, counting up an official tally will take time. New, preliminary estimates show attendance may top even the biggest events in U.S. history. For instance, the 2006 “A Day Without Immigrants” boycott had over a million participants.
Some critics dismissed the rally’s significance, with Steven Cheung labeling it “a complete and utter failure with minuscule attendance.” Yet, most participants and observers are hopeful—undeterred by the challenges—about the possibilities for such mobilization and collective action.
As Wasow articulated, “We see a cascade effect: if one person stands after the curtain drops, then more follow.” This cascading effect is crucial for sustaining momentum beyond a single event, as it encourages further participation and engagement in the movement.
Based on Levin’s rough count, turnout at the “No Kings” protests was on par with other demonstrations of historic significance. He highlighted the importance of harnessing the energy generated on that day into ongoing activism to ensure that the movement remains impactful.
Gloria J Browne-Marshall noted various methods for measuring protest attendance, stating, “There are different processes that have been used over the years, from eyeballing things to actually counting the number of people per square mile.” This variability makes it difficult to create a final, authoritative count, and highlights the importance of grassroots mobilization.