Federal flag ban targets pride symbols while carving out state, agency, tribal flags
S. 576 — One Flag for All Act · Filed by Roger Marshall (R-KS) · 4 cosponsors · Introduced Feb 13, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits flying any flag other than the U.S. flag on the exterior or in public-facing areas of federal buildings, military installations, and embassies—with narrow exceptions for POW/MIA flags, visiting diplomat flags, state flags in members' offices, military/Armed Forces flags, historical flags, public safety flags, holiday/memorial flags, religious flags at military ceremonies, agency flags, tribal flags, and local jurisdiction flags. The stated purpose is to enforce a single national flag standard in federal spaces.
Why we flagged it
The bill's functional purpose is to restrict which flags may be displayed in federal spaces, framed as national unity but operating as a content-based speech regulation that may disproportionately affect marginalized communities' ability to express identity in public federal buildings.
What the text implies
- The broad exceptions (state flags, agency flags, tribal flags, local flags, military flags, historical flags, memorial flags, religious flags) may swallow the rule—federal agencies and states could display nearly any flag under the 'agency flag' or 'local jurisdiction' carve-out, undermining the stated prohibition.
- The bill does not define what constitutes a 'flag that represents' a category (e.g., does a pride flag 'represent' public safety if displayed by a federal LGBTQ+ employee resource group?), creating ambiguity that may lead to inconsistent enforcement or litigation.
- Military installations and federal buildings in states with strong LGBTQ+ or racial justice movements may face internal conflict between the prohibition and employee/visitor expectations of inclusive symbolism, potentially affecting federal workforce morale and recruitment.
- The exception for 'flags of historical significance' (Betsy Ross, Gadsden, Bennington) is selective and may be perceived as privileging certain historical narratives over others, raising questions about which histories are deemed 'significant' by federal authority.
Who it affects
The bill restricts symbolic expression in federal spaces, which may limit LGBTQ+ pride flags, racial justice symbols, and other identity-affirming displays—raising free-speech and inclusion concerns for citizens who use federal buildings. However, the broad exceptions (state flags, agency flags, tribal flags, local flags, military flags, historical flags, memorial flags) substantially narrow the practical impact, and the core restriction to federal property (not private spaces) is constitutional
Named in the bill
Senate, House of Representatives, Architect of the Capitol, Military installations, U.S. embassies and consulates, Federal agencies, Indian Tribes, Armed Forces, National League of Families POW/MIA, Internal Revenue Code section 501
Where it stands
4 cosponsors: 4 Republicans.
- Feb 13, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
- Feb 13, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
7 lobbying clients named this bill on 11 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $1,814,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 9 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 86% of bills with at least one filing.
Roger Marshall, the sponsor, reported $1,777,391 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers — $710,000 on 1 filing
- Celanese Corporation — $460,000 on 1 filing
- National Propane Gas Association — $380,000 on 2 filings
- San Bernardino County Transportation Authority — $80,000 on 2 filings
- Solvay Chemicals Inc. — $70,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the full bill text on Jun 10, 2026; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Federal flag ban targets pride symbols while carving out state, agency, tribal flags” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/s576 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.