The U.S. Coast Guard found itself at the center of a heated national debate this week after a sudden policy controversy involving hate symbols such as swastikas and nooses. The episode unfolded rapidly, with an initial document appearing to downgrade the classification of such symbols, followed by an emphatic reversal and reaffirmation of a zero-tolerance stance—leaving service members, lawmakers, and the public scrambling for clarity.
It all started on November 2, 2025, when a Coast Guard policy document surfaced, seemingly redefining hate symbols as mere harassment rather than hate incidents. According to ABC News, the new language replaced the term “hate incident” with “harassment,” stating, "Conduct previously handled as a potential hate incident, including those involving symbols widely identified with oppression or hatred, is processed as a report of harassment in cases with an identified aggrieved individual." The document further noted that "the terminology 'hate incident' is no longer present in policy."
This change did not go unnoticed. On November 20, 2025, media outlets—including The Washington Post—reported that the Coast Guard was preparing to describe swastikas and nooses as “potentially divisive” symbols, rather than categorizing them as hate symbols. The shift was a departure from the Coast Guard’s longstanding policy, in place since 2019, which had explicitly listed such symbols as “widely identified with oppression or hatred” and classified their display as a “potential hate incident.”
The public reaction was swift and fierce. Lawmakers and advocates expressed outrage, fearing the new language would weaken protections against bigotry and potentially allow hateful symbols to be displayed with impunity. Democratic Senator Jacky Rosen of Nevada condemned the change, stating, “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.”
Jewish community leader and Cornell law professor Menachem Rosensaft also weighed in, warning that even considering a downgrade of the 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 called the move “disgusting, and it’s more encouragement from the Republicans of extremism,” according to the Associated Press.
Within hours of the uproar, the Coast Guard reversed course. On the evening of November 21, 2025, the service released a new, unequivocal policy. As reported by AP and ABC News, the updated directive declared, "Divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited," explicitly naming “a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups.” The policy stated these symbols "shall be removed from all Coast Guard workplaces, facilities, and assets."
In an accompanying press release, the Coast Guard emphasized that this 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.” Acting Commandant Admiral Kevin Lunday issued a categorical denial that the Coast Guard was rolling back any prohibitions, stating, “These symbols have been and remain prohibited in the Coast Guard per policy,” and adding, “any display, use or promotion of such symbols, as always, will be thoroughly investigated and severely punished.”
Lunday and Master Chief Petty Officer Phil Waldron addressed the controversy directly in a message to Coast Guard members obtained by ABC News: “Let me be absolutely clear: The Coast Guard's policy prohibiting hate and discrimination is absolute. These prohibited symbols represent repugnant ideologies that are in direct opposition to everything we stand for. We have zero tolerance for hate within our ranks.”
Despite the Coast Guard’s forceful statements, confusion lingered over how the initial policy change came about. The November 2 document, reviewed by ABC News, appeared to allow commanders to remove “potentially divisive” symbols if they affected unit morale or discipline, but stopped short of an outright ban in private spaces. The new policy, in contrast, left no room for ambiguity, banning such symbols entirely from all Coast Guard locations.
Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin insisted there was no “backtracking,” telling reporters, “The 2025 policy is not changing—USCG issued a lawful order that doubles down on our current policies prohibiting the display, distribution or use of hate symbols by Coast Guard personnel.”
Lawmakers from both chambers and across the political spectrum voiced their concerns. Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii pointed out the apparent contradiction in the administration’s messaging, saying, “So they are not approving the policy change that was in the works because the Washington Post reported about it. Good. But that means the reporting was accurate.” Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut accused the Department of Homeland Security of dishonesty, while Representative Lauren Underwood of Illinois said she had secured a commitment from Lunday to publish an updated policy. “Displays of hate have no place in our armed services,” she wrote. Representative Rick Larsen of Washington added, “Lynching is a federal hate crime. The world defeated the Nazis in 1945. The debate on these symbols is over. They symbolize hate. Coast Guard: be better.”
The controversy also comes amid broader changes in military policy. The Pentagon, under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, recently ordered a review of definitions for hazing, bullying, and harassment across the armed forces, citing concerns that previous policies were “overly broad” and could undermine combat readiness. The Coast Guard’s latest policy update was, in part, an attempt to align with similar Pentagon directives, according to internal communications.
Historically, the Coast Guard has modeled many of its human resources policies on those of other military branches. The service operates under the Department of Homeland Security but is considered a part of the U.S. armed forces. Notably, the new policy maintains a longstanding prohibition on publicly displaying the Confederate flag, except in educational or historical contexts.
Political tensions surrounding the Coast Guard’s leadership have added another layer to the story. Admiral Linda Fagan, Lunday’s predecessor, was dismissed on President Donald Trump’s first day in office, with administration officials citing her “excessive focus” on diversity and inclusion as a reason for her removal. Lunday, Trump’s pick for commandant, recently completed his Senate confirmation hearing, though a vote has not yet been held.
As the dust settles, the Coast Guard’s leadership is adamant: symbols of hate have no place in its ranks. The new policy, now in effect, leaves little doubt about the service’s official stance. Yet the rapid sequence of events—an initial softening of language, a firestorm of public criticism, and an immediate reversal—has exposed the challenges of navigating policy, politics, and public trust in today’s volatile climate.
For Coast Guard members and the nation, the message is now crystal clear: hate symbols are strictly forbidden, and the service intends to uphold that standard with unwavering resolve.
