Coast Guard Clarifies Controversial Guidance on Nooses, Swastikas After Lawmaker Outcry

The U.S. Coast Guard is moving to clarify a draft personnel directive that drew sharp criticism after it appeared to recast nooses, swastikas and other extremist symbols as "potentially divisive" rather than automatically labeling them as hate incidents. The draft directive, signed Nov. 13 by Rear Adm. Charles Fosse, prompted lawmakers and civil-rights advocates to demand immediate clarification and firmer prohibitions.

What the draft changed

The guidance, titled "Harassing Behavior Prevention, Response and Accountability," made several notable revisions to how the Coast Guard would treat extremist imagery and harassment claims:

• Eliminated the term "hate incident": Such conduct would instead be processed as harassment — and only when a specific victim is identified.
• Raised the threshold for discipline: Public displays of extremist symbols would be treated as misconduct only if they demonstrably harmed "good order and discipline, unit cohesion, command climate, morale or mission effectiveness."
• Allowed some private displays: The draft permitted symbols "widely identified with oppression or hatred" in private or non-public settings, such as military housing.
• Changed protected categories language: The draft removed gender identity from the list of protected characteristics — a change critics say aligns with policies that restrict transgender service.
• Altered evidentiary and legal standards: Harassment would have to be "severe or pervasive" and judged by a "reasonable person" standard; investigations and discipline would proceed under a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. The draft also included language suggesting that some hazing can serve a legitimate military purpose.

Immediate reaction

The draft prompted swift backlash. Rep. Lauren Underwood said she met with Acting Commandant Adm. Kevin Lunday, who assured lawmakers the Coast Guard maintains an "across-the-board prohibition on hate symbols, including swastikas and nooses." Rep. Rick Larsen condemned the revision, saying, "The debate on these symbols is over." Lawmakers and civil-rights groups warned the changes could narrow commanders' ability to remove racist or extremist imagery from workspaces, barracks and training areas.

How the Coast Guard responded

Hours after the draft became public, Adm. Lunday issued a statement promising investigations and strong punishment for displays of nooses, swastikas and similar imagery. The service then circulated a clarifying memo stating that "divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited" at Coast Guard workplaces, describing the memo as a clarification to counter misinformation about the draft.

Procedural implications and remaining questions

Although the clarifying memo reaffirmed a prohibition on hate symbols in public workplaces, the draft introduced several procedural elements that could affect how incidents are handled in practice: a 45-day window for victims to file harassment reports, a requirement that commanders notify their chain of command within 48 hours if an incident draws media or congressional interest, and broader discretion for commanders to determine whether conduct meets the "severe or pervasive" standard. The directive retains an explicit ban on public displays of the Confederate battle flag except for narrow historical or artistic contexts.

The Coast Guard occupies a unique position among U.S. uniformed services — subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice but operating under the Department of Homeland Security — and the debate over this directive comes amid wider discussions about personnel policy, including how the services address extremism, unit cohesion and standards of conduct. While the service has sought to reassure lawmakers, it has not fully explained why the earlier draft allowed private displays or removed the "hate incident" terminology.