More boycotts are planned against Target, Amazon and more. Here's what to know
After Friday's economic spending blackout, activists who support diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives are preparing for further boycotts.
The consumer economic spending blackout was a nationwide push encouraging Americans who support DEI to not shop for 24 hours. The Instagram handle "TheOneCalledJai" said the day of economic resistance was designed to show that "we the people are the system."
The same group behind Friday's action is planning more boycotts targeting Amazon, Nestle, Target, Walmart, McDonald's and General Mills in addition to two more spending blackouts.
Here's what Arizona shoppers need to know about the planned economic boycotts or blackouts, which businesses are being targeted and what to expect.
After Friday's economic spending blackout, the same group of activists is planning a second boycott.
The second economic blackout focuses on cutting spending with online retailer Amazon. The boycott will start on Friday, March 7, and last a full week, ending on Friday, March 14.
"TheOneCalledJai" also shared a flier on social media that lays out a series of upcoming boycotts:
Nestle: March 21-28
Walmart: April 7-14 and May 20-26
Second economic blackout: April 18
General Mills: April 21-28
Amazon: May 6-12
Target: June 3-9
McDonald's: June 24-30
Independence Day boycott: July 4
Target is also facing an indefinite boycott after phasing out its DEI initiatives.
Minnesota civil rights activists encouraged consumers to stop shopping at the major retailer indefinitely until it changes its policies, said Nekima Levy Armstrong, a civil rights attorney and founder of the Racial Justice Network.
Pastor Jamal-Harrison Bryant, senior pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Georgia and an activist and author, has called on the faith community to start a 40-day fast from shopping at Target during Lent starting on March 5, which is Ash Wednesday. The website targetfast.org also has been created to offer information.
Comedian and actress Leslie Jones announced on her Instagram account planned boycotts and buying actions starting in February and continuing through the end of the year. That plan explained in the video starts and ends with encouraging purchases directly from Black-owned businesses and then planned boycotts for one to two months at a time against Walmart, Target and Amazon.
Latinos are also being encouraged to freeze spending in response to freezes on DEI policies, funding for the National Institutes of Health and actions on immigration. Both the #LatinoFreezeMovement and #LatinoFreeze movement urge Latinos to purchase essential items only and focus on shopping at "Latino American, Black American and Allied American Businesses that are supportive to this movement."
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: These companies are being boycotted in 2025. Here's what to know
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
21 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
General Trump has entered the fray and this is just the beginning
Donald Trump has long had a keen fascination with swashbuckling generals from the Second World War. His rally speeches are peppered with anecdotes about General Douglas MacArthur and he used a clip from one of his favourite war movies to open his event at Manhattan's Madison Square a week before last year's election. 'Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser,' says George C Scott, playing Gen George Patton in the 1970 movie Patton. What could be more Trumpian? The president's first administration was packed with generals and retired generals. Mr Trump made no secret of his admiration for their can-do attitude and straightforward command structure until, that is, he soured on their adherence to rules and legal norms. This time around, his flood-the-zone strategy of bamboozling the media and Democratic opponents with a constant stream of executive orders, public comments, and proclamations could come from one of Patton's real-life quotes: 'As long as you attack them, they cannot find the time to attack you.' This week, Mr Trump is leaning into his role of commander-in-chief in a much more literal sense. He has deployed active service personnel as an arm of domestic policy to back his massive deportation push. As protests grew in response to immigration raids around Los Angeles, he took the highly unusual step of deploying National Guard troops at the weekend despite the opposition of the California governor. On Tuesday he used a speech honouring soldiers to defend his decision against charges it was a politically motivated stunt. 'Generations of army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third-world lawlessness,' he said at the army base in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. A day later, the first of 700 Marines arrived in Los Angeles. And he has left open the possibility of going even further, using the Insurrection Act, which authorises the president to deploy military forces on American soil to suppress domestic violence in certain scenarios. 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We'll see,' he said from the Oval Office. And then there is Saturday's military parade. More than 100 military vehicles and thousands of soldiers are set to roll or march down Constitution Avenue in front of the White House. Black Hawk and Apache helicopters will fill the skies. It will be the $50 million fulfilment of a dream Mr Trump has had since 2017, when he was a guest of Emmanuel Macron, the French president, at a Bastille Day parade. Hundreds of troops marching down the Champs-Élysées beneath plumes of red, white and blue smoke trailing behind fighter jets, left a deep impression on Mr Trump. 'It was one of the greatest parades I've ever seen,' he later said. 'We're going to have to try and top it.' A parade during his visit to China in 2017 also got the Trump seal of approval. He called it 'magnificent'. Then, he was quietly advised then that it would not be appropriate to parade the nation's military might through the capital. But like so much of his thwarted first-term agenda, he has spent the past four years staffing up with officials who can make his dreams come true. Officially, Saturday's parade will mark the 250th birthday of the army. And it doesn't hurt that it falls on the 79th birthday of Mr Trump. Critics say he is abusing the nation's armed forces for his own ends. 'He views the military as political props,' said John Bolton, who worked as Trump's national security adviser in his first term before falling out with him. 'He thinks they make him look good.' The event could serve another purpose, illustrating how Mr Trump is bringing the nation's biggest and strongest institutions into line. And as commander-in-chief he is the one to call the shots, illustrating his hold on power. Members of Washington's diplomatic corps will be in the audience on Saturday. 'He just likes the pomp and circumstance,' said one, speaking on condition of anonymity. 'I don't see an attack on democracy. Mr Trump looks around at other leaders and thinks that this is the sort of thing that a head of state gets.' In the meantime, polls suggest a limit to what he can do as commander-in-chief. A new YouGov survey found that 47 per cent of Americans disapprove of deploying the Marines to Los Angeles, with only 34 per cent approving, despite other polls showing that voters approve of the broader deportation operation. And while legal scholars will debate whether Mr Trump's decision to deploy troops stands up to scrutiny, and whether it breaches a federal law, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prevents the use of American forces to enforce domestic laws, the president sees things in black and white. He knows where the battle lines are drawn as he made clear in his Fort Bragg speech. He used highly partisan language to slam the Los Angeles protesters and to champion the armed forces. 'They're heroes. They're fighting for us,' he said. 'They're stopping an invasion, just like you'd stop an invasion.' His armed forces are all part of Mr Trump's us-against-them view of the world. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DHS Official Picks Fight With Kim Kardashian After She Speaks Out Against ICE
One Department of Homeland Security official seems to think she can throw down with a woman raised by Kris Jenner. On Wednesday, Tricia McLaughlin, the DHS assistant secretary for public affairs, decided to pick a fight with Kim Kardashian after the reality TV star simply exercised her freedom of speech. Amid the ongoing anti-deportation protests in Los Angelesthat were sparked by a rash of terrifying U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, Kardashian made it clear on her Instagram story Tuesday that her values align with the demonstrators. 'When we're told that ICE exists to keep our country safe and remove violent criminals — great,' Kardashian began her statement. 'When we witness innocent, hardworking people being ripped from their families in inhumane ways, we have to speak up. We have to do what's right.' She continued, 'Growing up in LA, I've seen how deeply immigrants are woven into the fabric of this city. They are our neighbors, friends, classmates, coworkers, and family.' 'No matter where you fall politically, it's clear that our communities thrive because of the contributions of immigrants,' she wrote. The beauty mogul concluded, 'We can't turn a blind eye when fear and injustice keep people from living their lives freely and safely. There HAS to be a BETTER way.' When Kardashian's statement made its way to X, formerly Twitter, Wednesday, it seemed to really get McLaughlin's Skims in a twist. '.@KimKardashian, which one of these convicted child molesters, murderers, drug traffickers and rapists would you like to stay in the county? These are just a few of the convicted illegal criminals who have been picked up in the last 72 hours,' McLaughlin wrote on X, alongside images of a few men who have been detained by ICE in Los Angeles, per some very colorfully wordedDHS press releases that include quotes from McLaughlin. Although McLaughlin didn't like Kardashian's statement, plenty of social media users did. Kardashian, who graduated from law school in May, has an interesting history with the Trump family. In 2018, she met with President Donald Trump during his first term to advocate for prison reform, and later claimed she helped soften his stance on crime (which, apparently, did not work). In 2023, the president's eldest daughter, Ivanka Trump, was pictured at Kardashian's birthday party, upsetting many of Kardashian's fans. The 'American Horror Story' alum also seemed celebratory on Trump's inauguration day in January, posting a caption-less photo of first lady Melania Trump's outfit to her Instagram story that same day.
