By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration has removed Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth from the list of fee-free days at National Parks for 2026. Instead, the Department of the Interior will celebrate additional former presidents’ birthdays and Flag Day, which coincides with President Trump’s birthday. This decision follows a broader focus on “America-first” policies and will impact which American holidays are celebrated in the park system. Critics express concern that the shift in fee-free days sends a troubling message about who the parks are for and a reduction in information about the nation’s struggle toward liberty and justice for all. The new fee-free days also include changes in park entry costs for non-U.S. residents.
Read the original article here
The decision to remove MLK Day and Juneteenth from the list of fee-free days at National Parks, announced by the Trump administration, immediately raises questions and stirs a range of reactions. It’s a move that, from the outside, appears to have profound implications.
MLK Day, a day dedicated to honoring the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement, has been a fee-free day since 2018. Juneteenth, commemorating the emancipation of enslaved African Americans, was added as a fee-free day in 2024. The sudden removal of these specific days is striking, especially when juxtaposed with the inclusion of other days, such as additional former presidents’ birthdays and Flag Day. This choice understandably fuels a perception of a concerning undertone.
The juxtaposition, in effect, signals a shift in priorities. It’s a move that’s quickly being interpreted as a deliberate message, and the reactions reflect a widespread sentiment of disbelief and frustration. The idea that these days, which celebrate significant moments in American history and the fight for civil rights, are being replaced by celebrations of former presidents’ birthdays sparks questions about the values being prioritized.
The immediate reaction underscores the importance that people place on recognizing and celebrating the milestones that reflect a commitment to equality and inclusivity. It underscores the belief that access to our national parks should be open to everyone, regardless of background or origin. Taking these free days away creates the feeling of exclusion.
The shift in these fee-free days quickly opens up an area of questions around the symbolism. Are we seeing a form of historical revisionism? Is this a means of minimizing the significance of events like the Civil Rights Movement and the end of slavery? The specific choice of MLK Day and Juneteenth raises the concern that the administration’s action is less about practical considerations and more about conveying a specific message.
It is worth noting that there are often a multitude of opinions on the value of fee-free days. Some argue that they encourage greater access to these natural spaces for all Americans. The potential consequences of reducing or altering these free days, especially when tied to specific cultural or historical events, are important to consider. The timing of this decision, coming at a time when racial justice and historical accuracy are prominent topics of discussion, makes it even more impactful.
Furthermore, this decision is not isolated. Some commenters also point out the increase in fees for non-residents to enter certain parks. This creates a picture of prioritizing access for specific groups and altering the experience for others. These kinds of changes are often noticed and are quickly judged in the context of what’s happening.
Ultimately, this move provokes a strong reaction. It challenges us to reflect on what we value as a society, what histories we choose to celebrate, and how we choose to make public spaces accessible to all. The concerns, questions, and outrage expressed surrounding this policy shift highlight the sensitive nature of these choices. The removal of MLK Day and Juneteenth from the fee-free days is not just a logistical change; it’s a symbolic one with the potential to resonate far beyond the boundaries of the national parks themselves.