How the Coast Guard Revised Its Policy on Swastikas, Nooses and Bullying; The New York Times, November 24, 2025

 John Ismay, The New York Times ; How the Coast Guard Revised Its Policy on Swastikas, Nooses and Bullying

"The revisions set off a backlash. Seth Levi of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit civil rights group, called the new policy “a national embarrassment.”

Just hours later, on Thursday night, the Coast Guard’s leadership gave assurance that the public display of hateful symbols would continue to be banned. But whether a service member could display such symbols in private remained unclear...

Why did the Coast Guard make the changes?

Neither the Coast Guard nor the Homeland Security Department offered an explanation for why the “hate incident” category was eliminated, nor why officials felt the need to create a distinction between public and private displays of symbols like nooses and swastikas.

The ban on gender identity issues, however, came straight from the White House."

In reversal, Coast Guard again classifies swastikas, nooses as hate symbols; The Washington Post, November 21, 2025

Tara Copp

, 

Michelle Boorstein

, 

Hari Raj

 and 

Victoria Bisset

, The Washington Post; In reversal, Coast Guard again classifies swastikas, nooses as hate symbols

"In a stunning and hasty reversal, the U.S. Coast Guard announced late Thursday that swastikas and nooses are prohibited hate symbols — erasing an attempt to soften their definition after the plan elicited furious backlash.

The abrupt policy change occurred hours after The Washington Post first reported that the service was about to enact new harassment guidelines that downgraded the meaning of such symbols of fascism and racism, labeling them instead “potentially divisive.” That shift had been set to take effect Dec. 15.

In a memo to Coast Guard personnel, the service’s acting commandant, Adm. Kevin Lunday, said the policy document issued late Thursday night supersedes all previous guidance on the issue."

Coast Guard Says Swastika and Noose Displays Are No Longer Hate Incidents; The New York Times, November 20, 2025

 John Ismay and Minho Kim, The New York Times; Coast Guard Says Swastika and Noose Displays Are No Longer Hate Incidents

 "The Coast Guard is redefining how it views harassment across the service, discarding the concept of “hate incidents” and recasting symbols of hatred, including nooses and swastikas, as potentially “politically divisive.”

In the past, the display of such symbols was unambiguously cited in policy as “incidents of hatred and prejudice” that “have no place in the Coast Guard.”

But the revised edition of the policy, which goes into effect next month, raises the bar for proving that displaying hate symbols in public merits punishment.

The new instructions, described in a document titled “Harassing Behavior Prevention, Response and Accountability,” was signed Nov. 13 by the Coast Guard’s assistant commandant for personnel, Rear Adm. Charles E. Fosse."

U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify swastikas, nooses as hate symbols; The Washington Post, November 20, 2025

 

Tara Copp

 and 

Michelle Boorstein

, The Washington Post; U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify swastikas, nooses as hate symbols

[Kip Currier: How dare this administration reclassify and downgrade the Nazi swastika and noose as anything less than the symbols of hatred and violence that they are.

This is abhorrent, abnormal behavior that is contrary to American values and ideals.]

[Excerpt]

"The U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify the swastika — an emblem of fascism and white supremacy inextricably linked to the murder of millions of Jews and the deaths of more than 400,000 U.S. troops who died fighting in World War II — as a hate symbol, according to a new policy that takes effect next month.

Instead, the Coast Guard will classify the Nazi-era insignia as “potentially divisive” under its new guidelines. The policy, set to take effect Dec. 15, similarly downgrades the classification of nooses and the Confederate flag, though display of the latter remains banned, according to documents reviewed by The Washington Post."