Controversial flag bill banning certain flags in classrooms passes House
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — A bill that would allow a select few flags to be displayed inside of public classrooms has passed the Utah House.
H.B. 77 — or Flag Display Amendments — would limit what flags could be displayed on government property by government employees or entities. Violation of this law could result in a $500 fine 'per violation per day' until the flag is removed.
The bill has been subject to scrutiny as it has moved through the Utah House. If enacted, the bill would prevent political flags from being shown, pride flags, and any flag that is not listed within the exceptions in the bill. Those exceptions include:
The official flag of the United States
An official Utah state flag
The current and official flag of another country, state, or political subdivision of another country or state
A flag that represents a city, municipality, county, or political subdivision of the state,
A flag that represents a branch, unit, or division of the United States military
The National League of Families POW/MIA flag
A flag that represents an Indian tribe defined by federal law
An officially licensed flag of a college or university
A historic version of a flag temporarily displayed for educational purposes
An official public school flag
An official flag of the United States Olympic Committee, United States or Paralympic Committee, International Olympic Committee, or International Paralympic Committee;
An official flag of an Olympiad or Paralympian that occurred or will occur within the state
A flag of an organization authorized to use a public school facility at the location and during the time in which the organization is authorized to use the public school facility.
These would be the only flags allowed to be displayed on government property. All others would be prohibited.
Initially being circled for further debate in a morning session of the legislature, after passing an amendment to the bill, it later passed in a 49-20-6 vote in the afternoon voting session on Friday.
Rep. Trevor Lee (R-Davis), the bill's sponsor, told lawmakers during debate that his bill was about maintaining political neutrality in schools and government properties.
'What we are trying to do here is make sure is that we have neutrality as it pertains to politics,' Lee told law makers on Friday. 'As many flags have become symbols of ideologies or political agendas from the left and the right. We would like to keep that stuff out of the classroom.'
The debate on the floor was limited, however when the bill was in committee, concerns were raised about the bills impacts the free speech of government workers. Ellie Menlove, policy councilor of ACLU Utah, told the House Education Committee that this bill targets the rights of LGBTQ people, and a pride flag wasn't a political symbol.
'The legislature should not stop teachers and cities from displaying flags that signal acceptance and support to their students and community members,' Menlove began. 'Respectfully, the bill sponsor is mistaken; pride flags are not political symbols.'
After the bill was passed, Utah House Democrats released a statement condemning the bill, saying, 'This harmful bill, which received bipartisan opposition, seeks to censor Pride and Transgender flag displays in public schools and government buildings. H.B. 77 is yet another example of unnecessary legislation aimed at silencing expressions of support and pride for our LGBTQ+ communities.'
The bill still has some ways to go before it can become law in the state. Having passed the House, it will go to a vote through the Senate after it goes through Senate standing committee. It will then need to be signed by the Governor.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Pakistan ramps up defence spending by 20 percent after India conflict
Pakistan has announced a major boost to defence spending in its new budget, just weeks after coming to the brink of a fifth war with archrival India. The budget for the fiscal year 2025-2026, announced by the government on Tuesday, ramps up defence spending to 2.55 trillion rupees ($9bn), up 20 percent from the current fiscal year, which ends this month. The hike in defence expenditures comes amid a cut in overall spending, which is shrinking by 7 percent to 17.57 trillion rupees ($62bn). The budget reflects Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's goals of spurring growth while boosting Pakistan's military in the wake of the most serious conflict between the nuclear-armed neighbours in nearly three decades. The bitter foes attacked each other with fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery for several days in May before a ceasefire was hostilities were triggered by a deadly attack by gunmen in Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22, which India accused Pakistan of supporting. Pakistan denied any role in the attack. A 20 percent boost in defence spending had been expected by economists, who said it would likely be offset by cuts in development spending, the Reuters news agency reported. India's defence spending in its 2025-2026 fiscal year, running from April to March, was set at $78.7bn, up nearly 10 percent from the previous year, and it has indicated it will ramp up its spending further in future budgets.

Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Pakistan hikes defense budget 20% following conflict with India, but overall spending is cut
ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan Tuesday hiked defense spending by 20% following last month's deadly conflict with India. The government of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced the increase as part of the budget for the fiscal year 2025-26, in which overall spending will be cut by 7% to 17.57 trillion rupees ($62 billion). Pakistan and India were pushed to the brink of war earlier this year after a gun massacre of tourists in Indian-controlled Kashmir, marking the biggest breakdown in relations between them since 2019. Weeks of tension followed, culminating in missile and drone strikes that resulted in dozens of fatalities on both sides of the border. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb said the government was allocating 2.55 trillion rupees ($9 billion) for defense compared with 2.12 trillion rupees in the previous budget. India in February increased its defense spending by 9.5%. Sharif told the Cabinet: 'All economic indicators are satisfactory. After defeating India in a conventional war, now we have to go beyond it in the economic field as well.' Opposition members of the National Assembly verbally abused Aurangzeb, chanting slogans, throwing scrunched-up copies of the budget at him, whistling, and banging their desks as he gave his address. The coming year's defense allocation is considerably more than the government's expenditure on higher education, agricultural development, and mitigating climate-related risks, to which Pakistan is especially prone.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
India and US advance toward interim trade deal after four-day talks, say sources
By Manoj Kumar NEW DELHI (Reuters) -Indian and U.S. negotiators made progress in their latest round of talks in New Delhi on Tuesday on a bilateral trade deal, having focused on market access for industrial and some agricultural goods, tariff cuts and non-tariff barriers, Indian government sources said. "The negotiations held with the U.S. side were productive and helped in making progress towards crafting a mutually beneficial and balanced agreement including through achievement of early wins," one of the sources said. The U.S. delegation, led by senior officials from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, held closed-door negotiations with Indian trade ministry officials headed by chief negotiator Rajesh Agrawal. Both sides discussed increasing bilateral digital trade, by improving customs and trade facilitation measures, the sources said, adding that "negotiations will continue" for early conclusion of the initial tranche of the trade pact. U.S. President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had agreed in February to conclude a bilateral trade agreement by fall 2025 and to more than double bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030. The two sides are expected to sign an interim agreement by the end of the month, before the expiry of Trump's 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs on major trading partners, including a 26% tariff on India. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal, currently in Switzerland for talks with European trade partners, said India is prepared to proceed with the deal by first addressing simpler issues. The next phase of negotiations could tackle more complex matters, with the goal of signing the first tranche of the bilateral trade pact by September or October, the officials added. India resisted U.S. demands to open its markets to wheat, dairy and corn imports, while offering lower tariffs on high-value U.S. products such as almonds, pistachios and walnuts, one of the sources said. India also asked the U.S to revoke its 10% baseline tariff. However, the U.S. side opposed this, noting that even Britain was subject to this under its recent bilateral trade agreement. Additionally, India sought an exemption for its steel exports from a 50% tariff. A potential 26% tariff on India would be devastating to Indian goods - including rice, shrimp, textiles and footwear, which together comprise nearly one-fifth of India's merchandise exports - and could severely hit exports and dampen foreign investment inflows. India has pledged to increase purchases of American goods, including energy products like liquefied natural gas, crude oil, coal and defence equipment. India's exports to the U.S. rose 28% to $37.7 billion in the first four months of 2025, while imports increased to $14.4 billion, widening India's trade surplus, according to U.S. government data. (Additional reporting by Sarita Chaganti Singh and Khushi Malhotra; Editing by Andrea Ricci) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data