Trump slammed by two Native American groups for supporting 'Redskins' name revival
Donald Trump
on Monday after he threatened to block a proposed new
NFL stadium
in Washington, DC, unless the local team reinstates its former '
Redskins
' name.
Trump, posting Sunday on Truth Social, claimed there was 'a big clamoring' for the
Commanders
- who adopted their current name in 2022 - to revert to their previous moniker, adding that 'our great Indian people' want it restored. He also called on MLB's
Cleveland Guardians
, formerly the Indians, to change their name back.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Struggling With Belly Fat? Try This at Home
Home Fitness Hack
Shop Now
Undo
In response, the
Association on American Indian Affairs
denounced Trump's push, saying such names and mascots 'do not honor Native Peoples - they reduce us to caricatures'. The organisation emphasised that Native nations are 'sovereign, contemporary cultures who deserve respect and self-determination, not misrepresentation'.
— IndianAffairs (@IndianAffairs)
The
National Congress of American Indians
(NCAI) also rejected Trump's comments, labeling racist mascots as 'an affront to Tribal sovereignty'. NCAI President Mark Macarro stated that the organisation has opposed such imagery for 75 years, asserting that mascots mocking and dehumanising Native people have no place in modern society.
Live Events
"We unequivocally oppose President Trump's call for the Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians to reinstate their former, racist names. Tribal Nations have been unambiguous on this issue for generations. We are not your mascot. We are not your distraction," NCAI said in a statement.
— NCAI1944 (@NCAI1944)
The Washington NFL team retired the Redskins name and logo in 2020 after decades of criticism. Trump's comments come as the team prepares to return to DC with a new stadium expected in 2030. While Trump cannot directly block the project, Congress - which oversees DC governance - could influence funding and approvals.
The Commanders, a storied NFL franchise with three Super Bowl titles, were ranked by Forbes last year as the league's 10th most valuable team, with an estimated worth of $6.3 billion.
Despite the criticism, the Native American Guardians Association voiced support for Trump's stance, accusing cancel culture of erasing tradition and identity.
— GuardiansNative (@GuardiansNative)
Other major sports franchises with Native American-themed names - such as the Atlanta Braves, Chicago Blackhawks, and Kansas City Chiefs - have said they do not plan to change their names, keeping the debate over sports mascots alive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
17 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Duty-free access to US cotton, agri items' quota likely on talks table
Duty-free market access to US cotton, accepting agricultural items under limited quotas — these are among the possible concessions that the industry has suggested ahead of the crucial round of negotiations later this month when the US team is expected to arrive in India, The Indian Express has learnt. Earlier this month, Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal had sought suggestions from industry executives on ways to sweeten the trade deal with the US. While some sectors have proposed incentives to accommodate US products, industry sources said the recent escalation in tension between New Delhi and Washington — due to additional tariffs over the Russian oil trade — is turning popular sentiment against a trade deal. Importing duty-free US cotton is one of the areas being suggested to the government, which would also benefit domestic manufacturing amid declining cotton production in the country. Notably, Bangladesh, which has signed a deal with the US, had also offered a similar concession. The US market accounts for nearly 30 per cent of India's total apparel exports. A government official said that quotas for American agricultural items have also been considered, but these do not include genetically modified (GM) products. There is significant resistance to GM crops in India, and only one GM crop — Bt cotton — is approved for cultivation. However, no GM food crop is commercially grown in India. Queries emailed to the Commerce and Industry Ministry on the issue remained unanswered till press time. Meanwhile, following the steep tariff announced by the US, the industry has sought immediate relief — like expansion of the Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products (RoDTEP) scheme to more sectors, and the Interest Subvention Scheme (ISS) for Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs). An exporter who did not want to be named said that established brands are not cancelling orders, but have begun putting them on hold, pending the outcome of negotiations slated for later this month. 'Everybody [US importers] is saying, give us at least three weeks to revert — so, till the US negotiators reach India by August 25, and then maybe some relief could come. Indian exporters can absorb five to seven per cent tariff. Pharma has margins, so the challenge is less there. But in most other areas, margins are low. Other items — say proprietary items like what Apple produces — can withstand the pressure, but footwear and textiles have little margin and the competition is intense,' the exporter said. Another exporter said that higher tariffs could increase exports during the 21-day window. However, if the 50 per cent duty comes into effect, Indian goods will be worse off as compared to China, Bangladesh, Vietnam and most of the other competitors. An executive operating in the gems and jewellery sector said the industry has sought support from the government on the lines of the intervention during Covid, as concerns over imports of rough diamonds still remain and Indian goods may not remain competitive in the US market after 25 per cent tariffs. The Indian Express reported on August 3 that the government has kicked off an exercise to thrash out concessions across sectors that can be offered in the tariff negotiations later this month. Key economic ministries have been asked to examine what they can still afford to offer to sweeten India's deal when the US team visits on August 25. Meanwhile, India has already stepped up its oil imports from the US, with imports jumping over 270 per cent year-on-year in the first four months of 2025. According to data released by the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCIS), India imported 6.31 million tonnes of US crude in January–April, a sharp increase from 1.69 million tonnes in the same period last year. Ravi Dutta Mishra is a Principal Correspondent with The Indian Express, covering policy issues related to trade, commerce, and banking. He has over five years of experience and has previously worked with Mint, CNBC-TV18, and other news outlets. ... Read More
Mint
41 minutes ago
- Mint
Harvard scientists warn of lost breakthroughs as Trump halts $2.6B in research funding
Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of US soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus," the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find nongovernment funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost," Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. "It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day." John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were canceled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard," she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Trump honors nearly 100 Purple Hear recipients at White House; pays tribute wounded veterans, service members who gave medals after 2024 attack
US President Donald Trump at an event to mark National Purple Heart Day (Image credits: AP) US President Donald Trump honored nearly 100 Purple Heart recipients at the White House on Thursday during a ceremony in the East Room marking National Purple Heart Day. Trump opened the event by recognizing the veterans in attendance and expressing his gratitude. 'Everlasting thanks to you and your unbelievable families,' he said. The Purple Heart is the oldest US military award still in use. It is given to service members who are wounded or killed while engaging in enemy action or as a result of terrorism. According to the National Purple Heart Hall of Honor, more than 1.8 million medals have been awarded since the decoration was established in 1782. National Purple Heart Day is observed annually on August 7. Among those recognised Thursday were several veterans who gave Trump their own medals following an assassination attempt at a 2024 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. A shooter's bullet had pierced the upper part of Trump's right ear just days before the Republican National Convention. In the months that followed, some Purple Heart recipients presented their medals to him at campaign events. Three of those veterans who gave Trump their medals attended the White House event, according to a White House official. The White House also said that some of those recipients were later brought to Trump's rallies so he could return the medals to them. Several senior officials attended the ceremony, including defense secretary Pete Hegseth , veterans affairs secretary Doug Collins, and Gen Dan Caine, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. Chris LaCivita, Trump's former campaign co-manager, also attended. LaCivita, a Marine veteran, is himself a Purple Heart recipient.
