Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Congress Bill Spotlight: Honor Inauguration Day Act

News

Congress Bill Spotlight: Honor Inauguration Day Act

The U.S. Capitol is seen through American flags flying at half staff in Washington, D.C., U.S.

Getty Images, Bloomberg Creative Photos

The Fulcrum introduces Congress Bill Spotlight, a weekly 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.

The American flag at the Capitol Building almost flew at half-staff during Trump’s inauguration. Should that be allowed?


The Bill

The Honor Inauguration Day Act would require the American flag be flown at its highest peak, never half-staff, on a presidential inauguration day.

The House bill was introduced on January 13 by Rep. Monica De La Cruz (R-TX15). No Senate companion version appears to have been introduced yet.

Context

Following the death of a president or former president, the American flag is required to fly at half-staff for 30 days at all federal buildings and facilities. One of the most prominent such federal buildings is the U.S. Capitol.

When former President Jimmy Carter died on December 29, 2024, that meant the flag was supposed to fly at half-staff until January 28, 2025. That period would have included Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration at the Capitol on January 20.

Trump protested this possibility. “The Democrats are all giddy about our magnificent American flag potentially being at ‘half mast’ during my Inauguration,” Trump posted to Truth Social on January 3. “Nobody wants to see this, and no American can be happy about it. Let’s see how it plays out.”

How it actually played out: Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA4), who only had authority over the U.S. Capitol Building, ordered flags raised there on January 20 only. It almost didn’t happen, though—the weather in D.C. was so cold that particular morning that the flags’ cords froze.

Shortly after taking office, Trump ordered that the American flag be raised for the rest of the day at all federal facilities, from the White House to embassies overseas. He ordered flags lowered back to half-staff in Carter’s memory once again from January 21 to 28.

While Trump’s proclamation declared it the new policy “on this and all future inauguration days,” that’s not actually codified in federal law, so it could be instantly overturned by a future president. Thus, this bill from Congress.

What Supporters Say

Supporters argue that on a day intended for happiness and unification, the flag shouldn’t be flown in a position of sorrow and mourning.

“President Biden has decided… to fly the flag at half-staff during a successor's inauguration. Meaning, when President Trump is sworn in, the flag will not be fully raised,” Rep. De La Cruz said in a press release. “Inauguration Day celebrates the will of the American people and their sacred right to vote and determine their own governance. It is not a day for the flag to be at half-staff.”

What Opponents Say

Opponents counter that the 30-day tradition has always been followed. Indeed, during Richard Nixon’s second inauguration in 1973, flags at the Capitol flew at half-staff for former President Harry S. Truman’s death a few weeks prior. Eerie photos show the bizarre visual of an inauguration with half-staff flags waving, a sight seen neither before nor since.

Biden’s White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked whether Biden would unilaterally act to raise the flags on January 20. She replied with one word: “No.”

Odds of Passage

The bill has attracted 17 cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a potential vote in the House Judiciary Committee, controlled by Republicans.

Jesse Rifkin is a freelance journalist with the Fulcrum. Don’t miss his weekly report, Congress Bill Spotlight, every Friday 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: Panama Canal Repurchase Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Make Greenland Great Again Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: BIG OIL from the Cabinet Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: renaming Gulf of Mexico as “Gulf of America”

Congress Bill Spotlight: constitutional amendment letting Trump be elected to a third term

Congress Bill Spotlight: adding Donald Trump’s face to Mount Rushmore

Congress Bill Spotlight: BAD DOGE Act

Congress Bill Spotlight: Repealing Trump’s National Energy Emergency


Read More

Person holding "Vote" sign.

Person holding "Vote" sign.

Photo provided

Latino Voters Shift Ahead of Midterm Elections

Two years after providing historic levels of support that helped propel Donald Trump back to the White House, Latino voters are shifting rapidly away from the Republican Party. The realignment is driven by a potent combination of persistent economic anxieties and a sharp backlash against the administration’s aggressive domestic immigration crackdowns. A landmark national poll conducted by NBC News and Telemundo reveals that the President’s approval rating among registered Latino voters has plummeted to just 27%, signaling deep political turbulence for the GOP on the eve of critical midterm elections.

When asked by reporters outside the White House about the plunging numbers, President Trump angrily dismissed the data, labeling the findings as “fake news.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Person placing ballot in voting box

Person placing ballot in voting box

Getty Images

Who Gave the Federal Government the Right to Decide Who Can Vote?

The Trump administration is pressing to remove noncitizens from voter rolls across the country. Yet an important question seems to be missing from the debate: Where, exactly, does the federal government get the authority to impose a citizenship requirement on federal elections? The Constitution does not make citizenship a universal qualification for voting. Instead, Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 states: “The Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.” At the same time, Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 explicitly grants Congress authority over the conduct of federal elections: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.” In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court distinguished Congress’s power to regulate how federal elections are conducted from the states’ authority to determine voter qualifications, explaining that Congress may regulate the “Times, Places and Manner” of elections, “but not who may vote in them.” For much of American history, noncitizens voted in elections in at least 22 states and territories, and some historical research suggests the number may have been as high as 40. Today, certain noncitizens are still permitted to vote in local elections in California, Maryland, Vermont and the District of Columbia. If the Constitution leaves voter qualifications to the states, what gives the federal government the authority to demand otherwise?

A Long History of State Decisions

Keep ReadingShow less
USA Presidential voters on electoral college map

USA Presidential voters on electoral college map

Getty Images

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Federalism at Its Best

Federalism operates at its peak when states collaborate as a unified network rather than acting as isolated silos. While the American system traditionally views states as competitive "laboratories of democracy," pure isolationism limits policy success. When states pool resources, align regulations, and share data, they solve national problems faster without expanding federal bureaucracy.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) represents federalism at its best by using explicit constitutional state powers to modernize the presidential election system without a constitutional amendment.

Keep ReadingShow less