Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Is the U.S. at "War" with Iran?

This question is not an exercise in double-talk. It is critical to understand the power that our Constitution grants exclusively to Congress, and the power that resides in the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military.

The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 recognizes that distribution of power by saying that a President can only introduce military force into an existing or imminent hostility if Congress has declared war or specifically authorized the President to use military force, or there is a national emergency created by an attack on the U.S.

Keep ReadingShow less
Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs
person sitting while using laptop computer and green stethoscope near

Healthcare Jobs Surge Mask a Productivity Crisis—and Rising Costs

Healthcare and social assistance professions added 693,000 jobs in 2025. Without those gains, the U.S. economy would have lost roughly 570,000 jobs.

At first glance, these numbers suggest that healthcare is a growth engine in an otherwise slowing labor market. But a closer look reveals something more troubling for patients and healthcare professionals.

Keep ReadingShow less
A large group of people is depicted while invisible systems actively scan and analyze individuals within the crowd

Anthropic’s lawsuit against the Trump administration over a Pentagon “supply-chain risk” label raises major constitutional questions about AI policy, corporate speech, and political retaliation.

Getty Images, Flavio Coelho

Anthropic Sues Trump Over ‘Unlawful’ AI Retaliation

Anthropic’s dispute with the Trump administration is no longer just about AI policy; it has escalated into a constitutional test of whether American companies can uphold their values against political retaliation. After the administration labeled Anthropic a “supply‑chain risk”, a designation historically reserved for foreign adversaries, and ordered federal agencies to cease using its technology, the company did not yield. Instead, Anthropic filed two lawsuits: one in the Northern District of California and another in the D.C. Circuit, each challenging different aspects of the government’s actions and calling them “unprecedented and unlawful.”

The Pentagon has now formally issued the supply‑chain risk designation, triggering immediate cancellations of federal contracts and jeopardizing “hundreds of millions of dollars” in near‑term revenue. Anthropic’s filings describe the losses as “unrecoverable,” with reputational damage compounding the financial harm. Yet even as the government blacklists the company, the Pentagon continues using Claude in classified systems because the model is deeply embedded in wartime workflows. This contradiction underscores the political nature of the designation: a tool deemed too “dangerous” to be used by federal agencies is simultaneously indispensable in active military operations.

Keep ReadingShow less