US Mint produces commemorative coin featuring President Trump's image

Treasury Department begins minting $1 commemorative coin bearing Trump's image despite federal law prohibiting living persons on currency.

Objective Facts

The U.S. Mint has begun producing a new $1 coin bearing President Donald Trump's face to help celebrate America's 250th birthday, the Treasury Department said Wednesday. The Treasury and Mint say the Trump coin is legal under that statute — specifically a law passed in 2020 authorizing the treasury secretary to issue $1 coins 'with designs emblematic of the United States Semiquincentennial.' However, according to Jeremy Paul, a professor at Northeastern University School of Law who specializes in constitutional law, 'The law prohibits, currently, on currency, the likeness of any person — not just the president — who is alive,' and 'Whatever precedent there might be, the law has changed further in the direction of trying to de-politicize the currency since then.' Trump is only the second living president to get this honor, after Calvin Coolidge in 1926.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Senator Elizabeth Warren, Ranking Member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, Senator Jeff Merkley, and three of their Senate colleagues sent a letter to the Treasury Department's Office of the Inspector General calling on the watchdog to investigate the resources the Treasury Department has devoted to developing a $250 bill featuring President Trump's image — a currency that would be illegal to issue under current federal law. Merkley and Cortez Masto in December also introduced a bill that would block Trump's efforts to put his face on the $1 commemorative coin, with Cortez stating: 'While monarchs put their faces on coins, America has never had and never will have a king.' Democratic Representative Joyce Beatty highlighted the decision to prioritize Trump's image over a decades-old commitment to Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill as evidence of presidential vanity.

Right-Leaning Perspective

Breitbart reported that 'The U.S. Treasury Department has unveiled a new $100 bill featuring President Donald Trump's signature and a dollar coin featuring his portrait,' with Trump's signature included on all denominations of paper currency to commemorate the 250th anniversary, 'making him the first president to put his name on cash.' Breitbart noted that 'While the Presidential $1 Coin Act of 2005 requires a president to have died at least two years before being placed on a circulating coin, the new Trump coin falls under the category of a commemorative, non-circulating coin,' and cited the 1926 precedent when 'a half-dollar coin was released with President Calvin Coolidge's face, marking the first time a president's portrait appeared on a coin during his lifetime.' In an appearance on Fox News, Treasury Secretary Bessent stated that the issuance of the coin with President Trump's likeness was allowable under the law, and cited the precedent of a coin featuring President Calvin Coolidge in honor of the nation's 150th anniversary.

Deep Dive

The specific legal angle of this story concerns whether the Circulating Collectible Coin Redesign Act of 2020—passed unanimously by Congress during Trump's first term—authorizes the Treasury Secretary to override the 1866 Thayer Amendment prohibition on living persons appearing on U.S. currency. The 2020 Act granted the Treasury Secretary authority to issue $1 coins 'with designs emblematic of the United States Semiquincentennial' during 2026 only, but did not explicitly repeal or waive the longstanding living-person prohibition. The Trump administration's legal theory is that this specific commemorative authorization, by being more recent and narrowly tailored to the 250th anniversary, implicitly overrides the general prohibition through the doctrine of specific statutes overriding general ones. Constitutional law scholars like Jeremy Paul of Northeastern University dispute this reading, arguing that the 2020 law contains no explicit waiver and that Congress's post-2005 legislation requiring presidents to be deceased for two years before appearing on coins reflects an intent to further de-politicize currency, not relax restrictions. The Coolidge precedent from 1926 cuts both ways: Treasury officials cite it as proof that living presidents can appear on commemorative coins, while legal critics note that no explicit exemption was passed for Coolidge either, and that those coins were controversial and largely failed (over 859,000 of 1 million produced were melted). The procedural challenge to court review is significant—a Portland lawyer, James Rickher, filed suit in March 2026 to block the coin, but a federal judge dismissed the case for lack of standing, finding Rickher had failed to demonstrate he was injured by the coin's production. What separates left and right framing is not just legal interpretation but constitutional philosophy. Critics frame the coin as fundamentally anti-republican, invoking the Founders' explicit rejection of monarchical imagery and the 1866 Thayer Amendment as a codification of that commitment. Supporters view the 2020 Act as clear congressional authorization tailored specifically for this commemoration, and cite Treasury Secretary discretion under 31 U.S.C. § 5112 to choose coin imagery. The disagreement is genuine and legally substantive: it turns on statutory construction (does a specific authorization override a general prohibition without explicit repeal?), standing doctrine (who can sue to prevent issuance?), and whether an executive agency can interpret a general Treasury coin statute as implicitly waiving a prohibition enacted 154 years prior. Court challenges remain possible once coins enter circulation and a vendor or customer has concrete grounds to refuse them as legal tender, though experts say standing barriers make litigation difficult.

OBJ SPEAKING

Create StoryTimelinesVoter ToolsRegional AnalysisPolicy GuideAll StoriesCommunity PicksUSWorldPoliticsBusinessHealthEntertainmentTechnologyAbout

US Mint produces commemorative coin featuring President Trump's image

Treasury Department begins minting $1 commemorative coin bearing Trump's image despite federal law prohibiting living persons on currency.

Jul 15, 2026· Updated Jul 20, 2026
What's Going On
  • The U.S. Mint has begun producing a new $1 coin bearing President Donald Trump's face to help celebrate America's 250th birthday, the Treasury Department said Wednesday.
  • The final design for the commemorative coin, being released in the fall, was approved earlier this year by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose members were appointed by Trump.
  • The move to put his face on the gold coin has drawn criticism in particular because federal law prohibits the depiction of a living president on U.S. currency, though the treasury secretary has the authority to authorize the minting and issuance of coins in some circumstances.
  • In 2020, during the first Trump administration, Congress passed a law authorizing the treasury secretary to issue $1 coins 'with designs emblematic of the United States Semiquincentennial during the one-year period beginning January 1, 2026.'
  • He's only the second living president to get this honor, after Calvin Coolidge in 1926.
Far Left: The coin represents Trump's broader pattern of politicizing neutral federal symbols for personal gain
Left: Multiple Democratic senators argued that the Treasury Department is prohibited from issuing currency with Trump's image, citing the Federal Reserve Act which explicitly states that 'only the portrait of a deceased individual may appear on United States currency and securities.'
Moderate: Moderate outlets note Congress passed a 2020 law authorizing special designs for $1 coins for the Semiquincentennial, and the Treasury and Mint say the Trump coin is legal under that statute.
Right: Treasury Secretary Bessent argued to Fox News host Jesse Watters: 'As Treasury secretary, I only have two mandates — the currency has to say In God we trust somewhere on it, and we cannot have an image of a living person. But we have the president's signature, which, again, I think is appropriate for the 250th.' Bessent used 'currency' in the 'paper money' sense of the word.
Far Right: Far-right outlets like Breitbart have reported the coin's announcement with minimal additional commentary on its legality
✓ Common Ground
There is bipartisan recognition that the controversy extends beyond the usual partisan divide, with opposition coming not only from Democratic lawmakers but also from Republicans who argue that a national celebration should not be used to elevate the image of a sitting president.
Across the spectrum, commentators including Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, note that the practice of putting the head of state on coins has long been 'associated with monarchies and other forms of authoritarian regimes,' that George Washington actively refused it for this reason, and that 'One of the reasons for Congress wanting to prohibit this is that we don't want presidents acting like kings.'
Objective Deep Dive

The specific legal angle of this story concerns whether the Circulating Collectible Coin Redesign Act of 2020—passed unanimously by Congress during Trump's first term—authorizes the Treasury Secretary to override the 1866 Thayer Amendment prohibition on living persons appearing on U.S. currency. The 2020 Act granted the Treasury Secretary authority to issue $1 coins 'with designs emblematic of the United States Semiquincentennial' during 2026 only, but did not explicitly repeal or waive the longstanding living-person prohibition. The Trump administration's legal theory is that this specific commemorative authorization, by being more recent and narrowly tailored to the 250th anniversary, implicitly overrides the general prohibition through the doctrine of specific statutes overriding general ones. Constitutional law scholars like Jeremy Paul of Northeastern University dispute this reading, arguing that the 2020 law contains no explicit waiver and that Congress's post-2005 legislation requiring presidents to be deceased for two years before appearing on coins reflects an intent to further de-politicize currency, not relax restrictions.

The Coolidge precedent from 1926 cuts both ways: Treasury officials cite it as proof that living presidents can appear on commemorative coins, while legal critics note that no explicit exemption was passed for Coolidge either, and that those coins were controversial and largely failed (over 859,000 of 1 million produced were melted). The procedural challenge to court review is significant—a Portland lawyer, James Rickher, filed suit in March 2026 to block the coin, but a federal judge dismissed the case for lack of standing, finding Rickher had failed to demonstrate he was injured by the coin's production.

What separates left and right framing is not just legal interpretation but constitutional philosophy. Critics frame the coin as fundamentally anti-republican, invoking the Founders' explicit rejection of monarchical imagery and the 1866 Thayer Amendment as a codification of that commitment. Supporters view the 2020 Act as clear congressional authorization tailored specifically for this commemoration, and cite Treasury Secretary discretion under 31 U.S.C. § 5112 to choose coin imagery. The disagreement is genuine and legally substantive: it turns on statutory construction (does a specific authorization override a general prohibition without explicit repeal?), standing doctrine (who can sue to prevent issuance?), and whether an executive agency can interpret a general Treasury coin statute as implicitly waiving a prohibition enacted 154 years prior. Court challenges remain possible once coins enter circulation and a vendor or customer has concrete grounds to refuse them as legal tender, though experts say standing barriers make litigation difficult.

◈ Tone Comparison

Left-leaning outlets and legal experts use explicit monarchy language ('we don't want presidents acting like kings') and frame the coin as politicizing neutral federal symbols, emphasizing the 1866 historical prohibition as foundational. Right-leaning outlets and the Treasury emphasize Treasury Secretary statutory authority and the 1926 Coolidge precedent as justifying the decision, presenting it as routine commemoration of the 250th anniversary.