Two federal lawsuits filed this week have turned a flagpole in New York City’s Greenwich Village into a referendum on how America tells its own story.
Stay up to date on LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate’s email newsletter.
At issue is the Pride flag at Stonewall National Monument, the first national monument dedicated to the LGBTQ+ rights movement. Earlier this month, the National Park Service removed the NPS-sanctioned Pride flag that had flown there since 2022, sparking protests in New York and a swift legal and political backlash. Now, one lawsuit filed in Manhattan seeks to force the government to restore the Stonewall flag, while a second, broader lawsuit filed in Massachusetts challenges what plaintiffs say is a systematic effort by the Trump administration to remove disgraceful history and science from national parks across the country.
related: New Yorkers rally in solidarity with LGBTQ+ community after President Trump orders Stonewall Pride flag removed
related: Hundreds of people fill the streets near Stonewall as New York City community members raise Pride flags that President Trump ordered removed.
Both cases address disputes, in part, over textiles. More fundamentally, they ask whether the federal government can selectively filter the historical record presented to the public and, above all, strip Stonewall of a symbol that has become inseparable from its meaning.
of new york incident The lawsuit was filed by the Gilbert Baker Foundation, Village Preservation, Equal New York, and other plaintiffs against the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service. The complaint alleges that the agency acted unlawfully and arbitrarily when it removed the official Pride flag from the monument on February 9th. The flag, installed after years of advocacy, is the first Pride flag to be permanently flown on federal land and bears the Park Service’s unique insignia, which the plaintiffs argue is a clear sign that the government recognizes the flag as part of the site’s historical interpretation.
The lawsuit alleges that the Park Service misread its own policies, ignored the Stonewall Monument’s founding documents and failed to follow required procedures under the National Historic Preservation Act, including consulting the public before making changes to the historic site. The plaintiffs argue that the removal violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it is based on the “ostensible” justification that there is no need to take down the flag.
Stonewall is no ordinary park unit. Established by President Barack Obama in 2016, the 7.7-acre monument encompasses Christopher Park, the Stonewall Inn, and surrounding streets where patrons and neighbors resisted a police raid in 1969. The uprising is widely seen as a catalytic moment in the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement. The National Park Service’s own founding documents state that the purpose of the site is to preserve and interpret its history and its continuing significance, and to place Stonewall within the broader story of American civil rights.
related: Mamdani, Schumer, New York City Council call on National Park Service to return Pride flag to Stonewall National Monument
related: Protests take place at Stonewall in New York City after the Trump administration removes Pride flags from national LGBTQ+ monuments.
Defenders of the Pride flag argue that the symbol is interpretive rather than decorative, a visual shorthand for the movement that Stonewall sparked. They say the removal is less about bureaucratic control and more about narrowing what the federal government is trying to communicate.
In the second lawsuit, filed in federal court In Massachusetts, a coalition that includes the National Parks Conservation Association, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and several historical and park ranger groups is expanding its horizons. The lawsuit challenges a series of actions taken by the Interior Department and the Park Service following a 2025 executive order that directed agencies to promote what the administration called a more “patriotic” take on American history.
According to the complaint, the government removed or altered exhibits and signs about slavery, climate change, indigenous history, and civil rights in parks across the country, often with little explanation or meaningful public process. Plaintiffs claim the campaign violates federal law, including one that requires the Park Service to reflect current scholarship and serve as an educational resource for a diverse population. They are seeking a court order to halt the removal and restore the materials already removed.
related: New York City Council advances resolution to oppose removal of Stonewall Pride flag
related: For New Yorkers, Stonewall’s new pride flag is just the first step
related: They can take down the flag, but they can’t take down the history of Stonewall.
In January, the Park Service distributed new internal guidelines regarding the display of non-authority flags, which the administration cited to justify removing the Pride flag. In most cases, the guidance states that only the U.S. flag, the Department of the Interior flag, and the POW/MIA flag should be flown on NPS-managed flagpoles, but does allow for exceptions for flags that indicate historical context.
The Stonewall plaintiffs argue that the Pride flag falls squarely within that exception, and that the government’s claims otherwise reveal a selective, ideologically-driven choice rather than a neutral application of policy.
in a statement to defenderSkye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represents plaintiffs in a wide range of park lawsuits, framed the case as a defense of the civic purpose of national parks.
“America’s national parks are living classrooms, telling stories of sacrifice, perseverance, and hope, allowing all visitors to learn about our history and the world around us,” Perryman said. “You can’t tell America’s story without recognizing both the beauty and the tragedy of our nation’s history. You can’t truly love America without understanding our true history and what it teaches us about the country we must work together to build and the nation we can become. The President’s efforts to erase the history and science of our national parks violate federal law and are a disgrace that honors neither our nation’s heritage nor our future.”
related: Following transgender, Trump erases bisexual people from Stonewall National Monument
related: Gay ex-FBI employee sues Kash Patel and Pam Bondi over Pride flag shooting
The legal battle is unfolding in parallel with the political battle. This week, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Representative Daniel Goldman, both New York Democrats, announced plans to introduce legislation to permanently place the rainbow flag on Stonewall, a move praised by the Gilbert Baker Foundation, which was founded to preserve the legacy of the flag’s creator.
“Every time there was a problem and someone tried to ban our flag, the Gilbert Baker Foundation was there. Through our ‘Save the Rainbow Flag’ initiative, we’ve taken bullies and bigots head on from California to New Jersey, Florida to Michigan. From the smallest town to Stonewall, we’ve shown up and continued the fight,” said Gilbert Baker Foundation President Charles Beal.
Source: Advocate.com – www.advocate.com
