The Coast Guard issued an emphatic rejection of a Washington Post story that claimed the service was preparing to stop classifying swastikas, nooses, and similar imagery as prohibited hate symbols. Acting Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday stated plainly, “The claims that the U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify swastikas, nooses or other extremist imagery as prohibited symbols are categorically false. These symbols have been and remain prohibited in the Coast Guard per policy.”
According to the Post’s reporting, internal documents suggested the Coast Guard — which operates under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — would soon categorize swastikas and nooses as “potentially divisive” rather than explicitly hateful. The paper said this policy shift would place such imagery in the same category as Confederate flags and would require supervisors to review complaints and consult with legal advisors before directing their removal once the change takes effect on December 15.
DHS blasted the article immediately. One message on X dismissed the piece as an “absolute ludicrous lie and unequivocally false,” while DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin posted, “The @washingtonpost should be embarrassed it published this fake crap.” The department followed with a second post saying, “Y’all are just making things up now.”
The Post reported that under the new guidance, Coast Guard members would have 45 days to report displays of swastikas or nooses. The newspaper also cited the service’s 2019 directives, which already empowered commanders to order the removal of such symbols even if they were not ruled a “potential hate incident.”
That 2019 guidance spelled out examples: “The following is a non-exhaustive list of symbols whose display, presentation, creation, or depiction would constitute a potential hate incident: a noose, a swastika, supremacist symbols, Confederate symbols or flags, and antiSemitic symbols, among many others.” The document added that these symbols are inherently connected to “supremacy, racial intolerance, religious intolerance, or other bias,” and that such imagery can appear in many forms, including images, wording, numbers, clothing, or materials.
The Coast Guard’s newly released policy, published this month, indicates that the term “hate incident” has been retired from official usage. It explains that “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, or in accordance with Chapter 11 of this Instruction.” The service emphasized that the new terminology does not alter the prohibition itself.
Adm. Lunday reiterated that principle in his formal response: “The Coast Guard remains unwavering in its commitment to fostering a safe, respectful and professional workplace. Symbols such as swastikas, nooses and other extremist or racist imagery violate our core values and are treated with the seriousness they warrant under current policy.”
Later in the day, however, the Coast Guard told the Post that it was reevaluating the updated language. “We will be reviewing the language,” Coast Guard spokesperson Jennifer Plozai said.
The issue caught congressional attention as well. Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which oversees the Coast Guard, weighed in pointedly: “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.”
