Full Breakdown
Judge Blocks NPS Permit Revocation Over “86 47” Flag
6/2/2026, 4:37:59 AM
Court Blocks Permit Revocation Over “86 47” Flag
On June 1, 2026, U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss issued a restraining order preventing the National Park Service from revoking Accountability NOW USA’s demonstration permit. The group runs an anti-Trump protest near the Meade statue on Constitution Avenue, and the order bars officials from ordering removal of a red, white and blue flag displaying “86 47.”
Background & Context
“86” is slang for “to throw out” or “to get rid of,” and “47” denotes President Donald Trump. The flag appeared after a White House shooting and after FBI Director James Comey was indicted for an Instagram post spelling “86 47” with seashells. Secret Service called it a threat.
Timeline of the Dispute
Key dates: April 13, 2026 – NPS issued a permit through Aug 12; May 12 – Secret Service questioned a volunteer about the flag; May 27 – Park Police asked the flag removed; May 28 – volunteer received Miranda warnings; May 29 – government filed a security-concern response; June 1 – Judge Moss issued the restraining order.
Official Statements
Judge Moss said the government offered no evidentiary basis that the flag threatened the President and that limits on speech must meet scrutiny. Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn argued the term could incite violence. Interior Department spokesperson said threats against the President violate permit rules, and ACLU-DC counsel called it a First-Amendment protection.
Criticism & Conflicts
Government officials argue the ambiguous “86 47” phrase justifies precautionary removal to protect the President, citing a heightened threat environment. Civil-rights groups and the ACLU view the request as suppression of dissent. Secret Service cites over 1,300 investigations and claims the term can incite violence; Judge Moss found no reasonable observer would see the flag as a true threat.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The government seeks to squelch core political speech without any articulable — much less evidentiary — basis for concluding that the speech actually threatens the life or safety of the President.” — Randolph D. Moss, U.S. District Judge
- “Based on my training and experience, I believe that this term, as it is understood today, can incite violence by others,” — Matthew Quinn, Secret Service Deputy Director
- “Today, the court recognized that the real threat is a federal government that seeks to punish criticism and trample on our freedoms,” — Laura Follansbee, ACLU-DC staff attorney
- “We are pleased that the court saw through the government’s baseless accusations about our 8647 flag,” — Anita Carey, Accountability NOW USA organizer
What’s Next
The restraining order lasts two weeks; after that the parties may seek a longer injunction. Both the government and the ACLU say they will continue litigation over the permit and whether “86 47” is protected speech.
