Jewish organizations are condemning the U.S. Coast Guard after new Washington Post reporting revealed the service quietly reclassified Nazi swastikas and nooses from hate symbols to “potentially divisive” imagery in an updated workplace harassment manual.
The change contradicts prior assurances from Admiral Kevin Lunday, the Coast Guard’s acting commandant, who had told Jewish leaders there would be no alteration to how the symbols were treated. We reached out to the Coast Guard and Admiral Lunday for comment.
Why It Matters
How the U.S. military classifies extremist symbols affects whether commanders can immediately remove them and discipline service members. The Coast Guard policy change comes amid rising concern over antisemitism nationwide and has triggered scrutiny of civilian oversight within the Department of Homeland Security.
The controversy is also directly affecting Admiral Lunday’s pending Senate confirmation, highlighting how internal policy decisions can carry political and institutional consequences beyond the service itself.
What To Know
A quiet policy change was finalized this week.
According to The Washington Post, the Coast Guard updated its workplace harassment manual to categorize swastikas and nooses as “potentially divisive” rather than explicit hate symbols, a shift that was not publicly announced.
Leadership assurances conflicted with the final document.
After earlier reporting raised alarms, Admiral Lunday told Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism that “the swastika has always been and remains a prohibited symbol of hate,” according to emails reviewed by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Lunday also issued an internal memo explicitly directing that the classification not be changed.
Why the wording matters.
Under Coast Guard policy, labeling imagery as “potentially divisive” rather than hateful can limit commanders’ authority to immediately remove it or pursue disciplinary action, according to the Post’s analysis. The Coast Guard, unlike other military branches, operates under DHS rather than the Pentagon and maintains its own conduct guidelines.
What the documents do not establish.
The updated manual does not explain who authorized the change, why the language was revised, or how it aligns with the acting commandant’s written directive. The documents also do not state that swastikas or nooses are permitted—only how they are categorized for enforcement purposes, according to the Post.
What People Are Saying
Rabbi Jonah Dov Pesner, head of the Religious Action Center, wrote in an open letter viewed byJTA that he was “outraged and baffled” that the policy change occurred after receiving assurances it would not.
Scott Stevens, national commander of Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America, said in a letter shared with JTA that the group was “deeply disappointed” and had received no response to questions previously submitted to Coast Guard leadership.
Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, said labeling swastikas and nooses as “potentially divisive” suggests “there is some context in which their use is appropriate,” adding that “nothing could be further from the truth.”
The Anti-Defamation League reacted on X by writing, “Here we go again.”
On the Senate floor, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criticized the policy shift, calling it “a ‘stand back and stand by’ in the form of an office memo,” referencing language associated with extremist groups.
What Happens Next
Sens. Jacky Rosen and Tammy Duckworth have placed a hold on Admiral Lunday’s nomination to become the Coast Guard’s permanent commandant, delaying a Senate confirmation vote that had been scheduled for this week.
The Coast Guard has continued to dispute the Post’s reporting, stating on its official X account that it maintains a “zero-tolerance policy toward hate symbols, extremist ideology, and any conduct that undermines our core values.”
