Fact check: Who filed the permit for the 250th US Army parade?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Megan Powers filed the permit for the 250th US Army parade on behalf of 250America.org, a group working on celebrations for the country's semiquincentennial ^[1]. The permit application was submitted on March 30, 2025, after President Trump took office, according to the National Park Service ^[2].

The parade is part of the U.S. Army's 250th birthday celebration, which took place from June 7-14, 2025 ^[3]. The National Park Service was involved in coordinating temporary restrictions of access to certain areas of The National Mall and Memorial Parks for the event ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the controversy surrounding this parade. There has been significant debate about the spending on this event, with Army leaders having to defend the parade costs and border spending to Congress ^[5]. The funding involved shifting money from other accounts to cover both parade costs and border defense expenses ^[5].

Additionally, there was misinformation circulating that claimed the Biden administration had approved the parade permit in June 2024, which has been definitively debunked since the permit was actually filed in March 2025 under the Trump administration ^[2].

The parade also coincided with President Trump's birthday, which adds political context that may be relevant to understanding the timing and significance of the event ^[1].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself appears neutral and factual, simply asking who filed the permit. However, the question exists within a broader context of deliberate misinformation that has been spreading about this event. Specifically, false claims suggested that the Biden administration had pre-approved this parade permit in 2024, when in reality the permit was filed months after Biden left office ^[2].

This misinformation campaign appears designed to either credit or blame the previous administration for an event that was actually organized under the current administration. Political actors and media organizations would benefit from perpetuating confusion about which administration was responsible for approving this expensive military parade, particularly given the congressional scrutiny over its costs ^[5].