Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: Preventing Presidential Inaugurations on MLK Day, Like Trump’s

Congress Bill Spotlight: Preventing Presidential Inaugurations on MLK Day, Like Trump’s

Donald Trump takes office for his second term as the 47th President of the United States.

Getty Images, Pool

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a report by Jesse Rifkin, focusing on the noteworthy legislation of the thousands introduced in Congress. Rifkin has written about Congress for years, and now he's dissecting the most interesting bills you need to know about, but that often don't get the right news coverage.

President Donald Trump falsely claimed his January 6, 2021 speech preceding the Capitol Building riot “had more people” in attendance than Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech.


What the bill does

In January, Trump's second inauguration coincidentally fell on MLK Day.

In response, the Proper Celebration of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and Inauguration Day Act would delay MLK Day by one day, to the third Tuesday in January, in years where it conflicts with a presidential inauguration.

The bill was introduced jointly by one Republican and one Democrat: Reps. Tom Barrett (R-MI7) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY5).

Why would MLK Day be moved, rather than the inauguration? The inauguration’s date is set by the Constitution’s 20th Amendment, while MLK Day is set by a 1983 federal law. So while it would take another constitutional amendment to move the inauguration, requiring higher numerical thresholds for ratification, it would only take a “regular” bill to change MLK Day.

Context

Martin Luther King Jr. Day is a federal holiday honoring the assassinated civil rights leader, Nobel Peace Prize winner, and Time Magazine 1963 Person of the Year.

Inaugurations are always held on January 20. MLK Day is always commemorated on the third Monday in January, which occasionally happens to fall on January 20. (Even though Dr. King’s actual birthday was January 15.)

Ever since MLK Day was first celebrated as a federal holiday in 1986, it’s coincided with an inauguration only twice: 1997 for Bill Clinton’s second inaugural, plus 2025 for Trump’s.

The next such occurrence won’t happen again until 2053, seven presidential elections from now. For comparison, Vice President J.D. Vance was elected last November at age 40. If the vice president (or even the president) who’s inaugurated in 2053 is the same age, they’d only be 12 now.

What supporters say

Supporters argue that both major observances should receive their respective full credit and attention, rather than cannibalizing each other.

“[MLK] Day and Inauguration Day both have profound significance in the U.S., and neither should ever overshadow the other,” Rep. Barrett said in a press release. “Our bipartisan bill makes a simple but important change to ensure the peaceful transfer of power and Dr. King’s enduring legacy both receive the full recognition they deserve. [We should] preserve these momentous occasions that undoubtedly deserve their own days of celebration as a nation.”

Nothing in that press release, from either the Republican or Democratic cosponsor, explicitly mentions Trump.

What opponents say

One surprising opponent: MLK’s daughter Bernice King. She opposes Trump, yet still found a silver lining in his inauguration’s timing.

“A Trump win could potentially set in motion a perilous and oppressive presidential administration, that would undermine and deny the hard-fought battle for civil and human rights for which my parents and so many others sacrificed,” she said in an interview with The Independent.

Yet, “I’m glad that if it was going to happen, it happened on the King holiday, because Dr. King is still speaking to us.” Simultaneously honoring her father’s ideals demonstrates how “we have to commit ourselves to continuing the mission of protecting freedom, justice, and democracy in the spirit of my father.”

Odds of passage

Besides the two aforementioned bipartisan cosponsors, the bill has not attracted a single other cosponsor since its mid-March introduction.

It awaits a potential vote in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The Fulcrum recently covered the Honor Inauguration Day Act, another bill inspired by Trump’s 2025 inauguration. The American flag almost flew at half-staff at the Capitol Building during the ceremony, due to the government’s official 30-day mourning period for former President Jimmy Carter’s death. The bill would require the Stars and Stripes to fly at full height on inauguration days.

The difference is, while the MLK Day bill has bipartisan cosponsorship, that bill is entirely Republican.

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his report, Congress Bill Spotlight, on the Fulcrum. Rifkin’s writings about politics and Congress have been published in the Washington Post, Politico, Roll Call, Los Angeles Times, CNN Opinion, GovTrack, and USA Today.

SUGGESTIONS:

Congress Bill Spotlight: No Invading Allies Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Suspending Pennies and Nickels for 10 Years

Congress Bill Spotlight: Trump’s Birthday and Flag Day Holiday Establishment Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Donald J. Trump $250 Bill Act

Read More

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/ProPublica

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals

Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.

Many job applicants are turning down offers, worried that the positions are not stable and uneasy with the overall direction of the agency, according to internal documents examined by ProPublica. The records show nearly 4 in 10 of the roughly 2,000 doctors offered jobs from January through March of this year turned them down. That is quadruple the rate of doctors rejecting offers during the same time period last year.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less