Cities Make New Official Juneteenth, Pride Flags to Thwart GOP
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Salt Lake City and Boise, Democratic-controlled cities in Utah and Idaho, have adopted new flags after Republican-controlled legislatures at the state level banned the rainbow pride flag and other unofficial flags from government property.
Newsweek has contacted the mayor's office for both cities for comment via email outside regular working hours.
Why It Matters
In recent years, Republican lawmakers have moved to restrict the display of unofficial flags, in particular LGBTQ+ pride flags. Upon President Donald Trump's return to office in January, the State Department implemented a "One Flag Policy," which mandated that only the American flag and two military flags could be displayed at U.S. Embassies and government buildings. The initiative and its response reflect a growing cultural divide in the U.S.
A pride flag hanging from the California Tower during the San Diego pride parade on July 20, 2024.
A pride flag hanging from the California Tower during the San Diego pride parade on July 20, 2024.What To Know
Earlier this year, Utah and Idaho passed legislation that banned non-sanctioned flags from government buildings.
In response, Salt Lake City has adopted new flag designs, while Boise has designated the traditional pride flag as official.
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall proposed adopting three new flags, which her office described in a news release as "celebrating human rights," and the city council unanimously approved the move.
The flags, which retain the sego lily featured in the current state flag, are the Sego Celebration Flag, representing Juneteenth; the Sego Belonging Flag, representing LGBTQIA people; and the Sego Visibility Flag, representing transgender people.
Utah law stipulates that any state or government building can be fined $500 a day for flying any flags that are not the U.S. flag, the state flag, a city or county flag, military flags, Olympic and Paralympic flags, official college flags or tribal flags.
Boise Mayor Lauren McLean adopted the pride flag as an official city flag.
Idaho's flag ban took effect on April 3, barring government officials from displaying any flags other than those on an approved short list, which includes the U.S. flag, flags of military branches and official flags of government entities. A separate ban containing some exemptions for school buildings is set to come into effect on July 1.
What People Are Saying
Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall said in a news release on May 6: "Our City flags are powerful symbols representing Salt Lake City's values. I want all Salt Lakers to look up at these flags and be reminded that we value diversity, equity and inclusion—leaving no doubt that we are united as a city and people, moving forward together."
Boise Mayor Lauren McLean said in a news release on May 2: "The City of Boise will continue to fly the flags on City Hall Plaza that represent our community and speak to our values of caring for people and welcoming all. This resolution formalizes which flags are considered the official flags of our city."
What Happens Next
Legislative moves against certain flags may continue as other states consider bills that would prohibit the LGBTQ+ pride flag from being displayed in schools.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
20 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Says China 'Not Easy' As Trade Talks Kick Off
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has described China as "not easy" to deal with, but touted progress between the two countries as negotiations go into their second day. "We are doing well with China. China is not easy," Trump told reporters at the White House on Monday. "Now I'm only getting good reports," he added, referencing the U.S. delegation currently meeting with Chinese officials in London. "It's a little early, but they'll be calling in soon. In fact, probably when I get back, I'll have my first call from them." On Monday, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer met with Beijing's chief trade negotiator Vice Premier He Lifeng. Others in the Chinese delegation include Commerce Minister Wang Wentao and international trade negotiator Li Chenggang. In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, center right, and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, center left, pose for a group photo with delegations before their meeting to discuss... In this photo released by Xinhua News Agency, Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, center right, and U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, center left, pose for a group photo with delegations before their meeting to discuss China-U.S. trade, in London, Monday, June 9, 2025. More Li Ying/Xinhua via AP Lutnick hailed the discussions as "fruitful," according to Bloomberg, while Bessent told reporters that the two delegations had a "good meeting." The talks may continue on Tuesday; China's Foreign Ministry has said that its delegation will be in the U.K. between June 8 and June 13. According to White House economist Kevin Hasset, Washington is seeking a "handshake" from Beijing, and the promise that the country will free up the flow of critical minerals to the U.S. "Our expectation is that after the handshake, immediately after the handshake, any export controls from the US will be eased and the rare earths will be released in volume and then we can go back to negotiating smaller matters," Hassett told CNBC ahead of the meetings on Monday. This is a developing story with updates to follow.
CNBC
20 minutes ago
- CNBC
'Collateral damage': Fund managers lobby Congress over Section 899 to avert foreign investors leaving the U.S.
American fund managers are lobbying Congress over a provision tucked inside President Donald Trump's tax bill that they say could lead to foreign investors "quickly" pulling investments out of the U.S. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which passed through the U.S. House of Representatives in May, aims to penalize foreign-owned firms operating in the U.S. and that are from countries with "unfair foreign taxes" under a provision known as Section 899. It is currently being considered by the Senate. The Investment Company Institute (ICI), which represents fund houses in the U.S., is lobbying Congress for an amendment as it warns the bill in its current form also impacts most foreign investments in U.S. stock markets, according to documents seen by CNBC. "In order to avoid the impact of section 899, portfolio investors are likely to retreat quickly from US equities, leading to capital outflows from the United States," the ICI said in a letter sent to Senator Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 5. "If sustained selling by foreign investors depresses US equity markets, this would harm both US companies and investors." Section 899 aims to introduce retaliatory tax measures against entities from countries that have levies such as the Digital Services Taxes and the OECD's global minimum tax rules. If signed into law, it could impact investors from the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Switzerland, among others. The tax would start at 5% and escalate by five percentage points annually to a maximum of 20%, on top of existing taxes, which vary by country and tax treaties. That could dent returns for foreign investors in U.S. equities. In the letter, the ICI also suggests that the U.S. fund management industry, which has collectively invested around $18 trillion in U.S. stock markets, would be "collateral damage" due to the impact of Section 899. "We do believe, however, that the current drafting of proposed section 899 should clarify its scope and avoid discouraging foreign investment in US equity markets through 'investment funds' such as US mutual funds and ETFs and their foreign counterparts (e.g., UCITS funds)," the ICI said. The letter to Senators goes on to say, "section 899 would penalize these funds and their shareholders by taxing passive income from US equity investments. To this end, investment funds would be collateral damage to the intended focus of section 899." Funds typically charge fees as a percentage of assets under management, and a withdrawal by foreign investors, over Section 899 concerns, could lead to lower earnings for the investment management firm. The Senate Finance Committee declined to comment, and Senator Mike Crapo's office did not respond to CNBC's request for comment. Foreign investors own $19 trillion in the U.S. stock markets, $7 trillion in U.S. government bonds, and $5 trillion in U.S. credit, according to data compiled by Apollo Global Management. The ICI said it's largely in support of the U.S. government's attempt to "protect US business interests overseas and to address discriminatory foreign taxes." However, it cautions that the current draft of the bill does the opposite. "Some foreign governments may actually cheer this capital flight from the United States because it benefits their local equity markets, which is not the behavioral incentive that Section 899 seeks to achieve," it said. Yuri Khodjamirian, chief investment officer for Tema ETFs, said investors in Europe who are focused on dividend-distributing U.S. companies would be "thinking quite carefully" about their holdings at this stage. "If suddenly you have to pay tax on that income, why would you hold that?" Khodjamirian questioned. Tema ETFs runs the American Reshoring ETF that is available to both U.S. and foreign investors. Tax experts suggest earnings paid out to foreign investors are more likely to be hit by Section 899 than capital gains and other methods of shareholder distributions. The Tema ETFs investment chief cautioned that the impact on the U.S. equities market would be relatively minimal as U.S. companies, say in the S&P 500, are typically not known for their dividends. "In the US, dividend yields are quite low. There's not a lot of companies paying. And most of the capital gets returned to share buybacks," Khodjamirian told CNBC. "Is that actually going to be that big of an issue then?"
Boston Globe
33 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's latest manufactured crisis has Los Angeles in its grip
Advertisement And it's hard to imagine them voting to trample local local enforcement. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up But then this administration has been just spoiling for a confrontation — especially in Los Angeles, with presidential advisers like And the president threw gasoline on the fire. Even as more demonstrators took to the streets, Advertisement Now there is no excuse for violence on the streets of any American city — and burning Waymo robot-driven cabs is hardly a good image for those with legitimate concerns about tactics used by immigration forces. The initial demonstrations were touched off by immigration raids at a garment factory and But throughout the weekend there was also no evidence that state and local police were incapable of dealing with the situation without the unasked-for federal intervention. In fact, some These are not the LA riots of 1992 in the wake of the verdict acquitting police officers of beating a Black man, Rodney King. Some Trump has long been the master of the manufactured crisis — the kind he has repeatedly used to justify broad use of executive powers. The president had barely finished taking the oath of office, when he declared a crisis at the border, requiring an Then there was the declaration of an equally nonexistent In April, with the Advertisement But by calling out the National Guard in California, on his own initiative and under false pretenses, Trump has entered new and more dangerous territory. 'The people who are causing the problems are bad people, they are insurrectionists,' Trump The president has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act but instead is using a section of the US Code on Armed Services ( That certainly explains Trump's escalating rhetoric and that of his administration, but it is an allegation that at the end of the day would have to be proven in court. 'Federal law enforcement officers were attacked by violent radicals and illegal criminals waving foreign flags because Governor Newsom was too weak to protect the city,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt Those 'foreign flags' were evidence not of an 'invasion' but for many Mexican-Americans in LA, But for this administration there is no detail that can't be used to distort the truth. 'Let me be clear: There is no invasion. There is no rebellion,' Advertisement Sure, Trump has long had it in for California, threatening to But the truly horrifying thing about Trump's current move is that it could happen to each and every state in the nation — or, more likely, to each and every Democratic state, especially when truth is so irrelevant to the Trump administration and facts are so fungible. The other danger is that having normalized the deployment of troops during manufactured crises, Trump will feel empowered to use them in even more forceful or aggressive ways if and when the nation faces actual crises. California's political leaders will not be fighting this battle on behalf of the rule of law alone. It's our fight too, and it won't be the last. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
