Hegseth Orders Renaming Of Navy Ship Honoring LGBTQ+ Icon Harvey Milk: Reports
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the Navy to rename the USNS Harvey Milk honoring the slain LGBTQ+ rights icon and military veteran, according to reports.
The timing of the name change, which was reported on the third day of Pride Month, was intentional, a person familiar with the plans told Military.com, which was the first to report Hegseth's order.
When reached for comment, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell wouldn't confirm the name change but said Hegseth is focused on aligning military institutions with President Donald Trump's views.
'Secretary Hegseth is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all DOD installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief's priorities, our nation's history, and the warrior ethos. Any potential renaming(s) will be announced after internal reviews are complete,' Parnell said.
A memo obtained by Military.com shows that the name change is scheduled to be announced June 13 aboard the USS Constitution.
Milk was the first openly gay man elected to public office in California. He served less than a year on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors before being assassinated in 1978. Prior to his career in politics, Milk joined the Navy during the Korean War and served until 1955 when he was forcibly discharged because of his sexual orientation.
The USNS Harvey Milk was named in his honor in 2016, while President Barack Obama was still in office. It was one of several ships named for civil rights icons that year.
Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, who represents much of San Francisco in Congress, reacted to the reported name change, calling it a 'shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream.'
'Our military is the most powerful in the world – but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the 'warrior' ethos,' she said in a statement. 'Instead, it is a surrender of a fundamental American value: to honor the legacy of those who worked to build a better country.'
CBS News also reported Tuesday that the Navy is considering changing the names of ships honoring the late Supreme Court justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Thurgood Marshall, Harriet Tubman, Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez, among other civil rights icons.
Hegseth, Bedeviled By Leaks, Orders More Restrictions On Press At Pentagon
China Knocks Hegseth's 'Cold War Mentality' After He Calls The Country A Threat
Pete Hegseth's 'Incredibly Problematic' Pentagon Event Raises Serious Concerns
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
18 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Supreme Court makes it easier to claim ‘reverse discrimination' in employment, in a case from Ohio
WASHINGTON — A unanimous Supreme Court made it easier Thursday to bring lawsuits over so-called reverse discrimination, siding with an Ohio woman who claims she didn't get a job and then was demoted because she is straight. The justices' decision affects lawsuits in 20 states and the District of Columbia where, until now, courts had set a higher bar when members of a majority group, including those who are white and heterosexual, sue for discrimination under federal law. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote for the court that federal civil rights law draws no distinction between members of majority and minority groups. 'By establishing the same protections for every 'individual' — without regard to that individual's membership in a minority or majority group — Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone,' Jackson wrote. The court ruled in an appeal from Marlean Ames, who has worked for the Ohio Department of Youth Services for more than 20 years. Though he joined Jackson's opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas noted in a separate opinion that some of the country's 'largest and most prestigious employers have overtly discriminated against those they deem members of so-called majority groups.' Thomas, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, cited a brief filed by America First Legal, a conservative group founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller, to assert that 'American employers have long been 'obsessed' with 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' initiatives and affirmative action plans.' Two years ago, the court's conservative majority outlawed consideration of race in university admissions. Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has ordered an end to DEI policies in the federal government and has sought to end government support for DEI programs elsewhere. Some of the new administration's anti-DEI initiatives have been temporarily blocked in federal court. Jackson's opinion makes no mention of DEI. Instead, she focused on Ames' contention that she was passed over for a promotion and then demoted because she is heterosexual. Both the job she sought and the one she had held were given to LGBTQ people. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bars sex discrimination in the workplace. A trial court and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Ames. The 6th circuit is among the courts that had required an additional requirement for people like Ames, showing 'background circumstances' that might include that LGBTQ people made the decisions affecting Ames or statistical evidence of a pattern of discrimination against members of the majority group. The appeals court noted that Ames didn't provide any such circumstances. But Jackson wrote that 'this additional 'background circumstances' requirement is not consistent with Title VII's text or our case law construing the statute.'
Washington Post
18 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Top US universities raced to become global campuses. Under Trump, it's becoming a liability
WASHINGTON — Three decades ago, foreign students at Harvard University accounted for just 11% of the total student body. Today, they account for 26%. Like other prestigious U.S. universities, Harvard for years has been cashing in on its global cache to recruit the world's best students. Now, the booming international enrollment has left colleges vulnerable to a new line of attack from President Donald Trump. The president has begun to use his control over the nation's borders as leverage in his fight to reshape American higher education. Trump's latest salvo against Harvard uses a broad federal law to bar foreign students from entering the country to attend the campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. His order applies only to Harvard, but it poses a threat to other universities his administration has targeted as hotbeds of liberalism in need of reform. It's rattling campuses under federal scrutiny, including Columbia University , where foreign students make up 40% of the campus. As the Trump administration stepped up reviews of new student visas last week, a group of Columbia faculty and alumni raised concerns over Trump's gatekeeping powers. 'Columbia's exposure to this 'stroke of pen' risk is uniquely high,' the Stand Columbia Society wrote in a newsletter. People from other countries made up about 6% of all college students in the U.S. in 2023, but they accounted for 27% of the eight schools in the Ivy League, according to an Associated Press analysis of Education Department data. Columbia's 40% was the largest concentration, followed by Harvard and Cornell at about 25%. Brown University had the smallest share at 20%. Other highly selective private universities have seen similar trends, including at Northeastern University and New York University, which each saw foreign enrollment double between 2013 and 2023. Growth at public universities has been more muted. Even at the 50 most selective public schools, foreign students account for about 11% of the student body. America's universities have been widening their doors to foreign students for decades, but the numbers shot upward starting around 2008, as Chinese students came to U.S. universities in rising numbers. It was part of a 'gold rush' in higher education, said William Brustein, who orchestrated the international expansion of several universities. 'Whether you were private or you were public, you had to be out in front in terms of being able to claim you were the most global university,' said Brustein, who led efforts at Ohio State University and West Virginia University. The race was driven in part by economics, he said. Foreign students typically aren't eligible for financial aid, and at some schools they pay two or three times the tuition rate charged to U.S. students. Colleges also were eyeing global rankings that gave schools a boost if they recruited larger numbers of foreign students and scholars, he said. But the expansion wasn't equal across all types of colleges — public universities often face pressure from state lawmakers to limit foreign enrollment and keep more seats open for state residents. Private universities don't face that pressure, and many aggressively recruited foreign students as their numbers of U.S. students stayed flat. The college-going rate among American students has changed little for decades, and some have been turned off on college by the rising costs and student debt loads. Proponents of international exchange say foreign students pour billions of dollars into the U.S. economy, and many go on to support the nation's tech industry and other fields in need of skilled workers. Most international students study the STEM fields of science, technology, engineering and math. In the Ivy League, most international growth has been at the graduate level, while undergraduate numbers have seen more modest increases. Foreign graduate students make up more than half the students at Harvard's government and design schools, along with five of Columbia's schools. The Ivy League has been able to outpace other schools in large part because of its reputation, Brustein said. He recalls trips to China and India, where he spoke with families that could recite where each Ivy League school sat in world rankings. 'That was the golden calf for these families. They really thought, 'If we could just get into these schools, the rest of our lives would be on easy street,'' he said. Last week, Trump said he thought Harvard should cap its foreign students to about 15%. 'We have people who want to go to Harvard and other schools, they can't get in because we have foreign students there,' Trump said at a news conference. The university called Trump's latest action banning entry into the country to attend Harvard 'yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights.' In a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's previous attempt to block international students at Harvard, the university said its foreign student population was the result of 'a painstaking, decades-long project' to attract the most qualified international students. Losing access to student visas would immediately harm the school's mission and reputation, it said. 'In our interconnected global economy,' the school said, 'a university that cannot welcome students from all corners of the world is at a competitive disadvantage.' ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump budget bill would kill subsidies that made home solar mainstream
By Nichola Groom (Reuters) -A last-minute tweak to the Republican budget bill passed by Congress last month would immediately end subsidies for solar leasing companies that help make rooftop systems affordable to homeowners, likely leading to a massive drop in the pace of installations, according to industry representatives. President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill," now being taken up by the Republican-controlled Senate, would eliminate a 30% tax credit for solar leasing companies that charge homeowners a monthly fee for panels - one of numerous cuts directed at clean energy subsidies passed by former President Joe Biden. That provision, inserted shortly before the bill passed the House of Representatives on May 22, risks stifling a sector that buys American-made equipment, employs thousands of people and relieves strain on the grid, according to industry backers. "That's one of the harsher components of the one big, beautiful bill currently," said Gabe Rubio, a principal in the business incentives and tax credits practice at professional services firm BDO. Tax credits for homeowners who own their own rooftop systems would also be eliminated. The changes could result in as much as 40% less residential solar capacity being installed over the next five years, according to energy research firm Wood Mackenzie. Solar companies are lobbying the Senate to make changes to the bill before it becomes law. "America's home solar and storage industry is a powerful economic growth engine," Sunrun CEO Mary Powell said in a statement. "Senate Republicans now have an opportunity to advance the administration's energy independence agenda by amending this bill to keep American energy prices low and create well-paying U.S. manufacturing jobs." Trump campaigned on a promise to repeal the clean energy tax credits in Biden's 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, arguing they are expensive, unnecessary and harmful to business. Republican backers of the bill say the subsidy cuts would free up billions of dollars for other priorities. More than 5 million U.S. homes have solar panels, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. LAST MINUTE CHANGE An earlier version of the bill had protected the credit for leased solar systems, but fiscal hawks including Representative Chip Roy of Texas have said publicly that they pressed for deeper cuts to clean energy credits at the eleventh hour. Roy's office did not respond to a request for comment. Solar leasing was pioneered two decades ago by companies including Sunrun and SolarCity, which is now owned by Elon Musk's company Tesla, and quickly became the primary way home solar panels were financed. Under the model, solar installers partner with financiers that own the rooftop panels and offset their federal tax bills by claiming the credit. Homeowners either pay a monthly fixed fee to lease the equipment or pay for the electricity the system generates under a power purchase agreement (PPA). In what some analysts have said could be a loophole, the House bill directly references leased systems but does not mention PPAs. About 44% of residential systems sold today are under such arrangements, according to EnergySage, an online solar marketplace. Solar installers say undermining the subsidies could have a ripple effect on U.S. manufacturers that supply them. Freedom Forever, a top privately-held installer based in Temecula, California, said in two years it has gone from using no U.S.-made equipment to now sourcing 85% of it from American facilities. That is thanks to another IRA subsidy that provides bonus 10% tax credits for using American-made equipment. "The administration wants to bring manufacturing back to the United States, and that's what our industry has been doing for the last two to three years," Freedom Forever CEO Brett Bouchy said. Sign in to access your portfolio
