Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The U.S. Coast Guard on Thursday night issued a sharply worded policy banning the display of hate symbols at all of its installations, hours after public revelations that an earlier draft had described swastikas, nooses and other extremist imagery as merely “potentially divisive.” The wording prompted swift criticism from lawmakers, civil rights advocates and Jewish organizations.
“Divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited,” the new directive states, explicitly listing “a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups.” The Coast Guard said in a statement that the release was “not an updated policy but a new policy to combat any misinformation and double down that the U.S. Coast Guard forbids these symbols.”
The late-night announcement followed reporting, led by The Washington Post, revealing that the Coast Guard had circulated an internal policy earlier in November that softened previous language. The older version labeled the same symbols “potentially divisive,” a departure from a 2019 rule that described swastikas and nooses as “widely identified with oppression or hatred” and treated their display as a “potential hate incident.”
Under the new directive, hate symbols are banned across all Coast Guard properties without exception. The earlier draft had allowed commanders to order their removal from public spaces but stopped short of an outright ban, while permitting them to remain in private areas such as family housing.
A longstanding prohibition on publicly displaying the Confederate flag — except in limited educational or historical contexts — remains unchanged.
The renewed guidance took effect immediately. Critics welcomed the reversal but raised questions about how the earlier draft was approved.
Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., said the initial language “rolls back important protections against bigotry and could allow for horrifically hateful symbols like swastikas and nooses to be inexplicably permitted to be displayed.”
“At a time when antisemitism is rising in the United States and around the world, relaxing policies aimed at fighting hate crimes not only sends the wrong message to the men and women of our Coast Guard, but it puts their safety at risk,” Rosen said.
Acting Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday pushed back on claims that the service had weakened its stance. Calling the idea “categorically false,” Lunday said the Coast Guard has long prohibited such symbols. “Any display, use or promotion of such symbols, as always, will be thoroughly investigated and severely punished,” he said.
The earlier November draft also removed the term “hate incident” from policy, directing commanders to instead classify such acts as “reports of harassment” when there is a clear victim. It also allowed the removal of “potentially divisive” symbols when they were judged to harm morale or discipline. The new policy does not specify how the service will define or track hate incidents going forward.
The Coast Guard said the update was partly intended to align its regulations with similar Pentagon directives. The service, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security in peacetime, has historically modeled its personnel and conduct policies on the Department of Defense.
The controversy comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth conducts a broad review of hazing, bullying and harassment definitions across the armed forces, arguing that existing rules may be “overly broad” and harmful to readiness. Pentagon officials provided no details on whether that review could lead to similar changes.
Civil rights groups said the Coast Guard must make its standards unequivocal. Menachem Rosensaft, a Cornell law professor and prominent Jewish community leader, warned that reconsidering a swastika’s classification would be “equivalent to dismissing the Ku Klux Klan’s burning crosses and hoods as merely ‘potentially divisive.’”
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the initial Coast Guard draft as “disgusting,” saying it signaled “more encouragement from the Republicans of extremism.”
