R&A must choose legacy over divisiveness for 2028 Open Championship
(Image: Matthew McGregor is the CEO of 38 Degrees)
38 Degrees is a community of more than a million people who – in a moment away from their busy days – take small actions on issues they care about, which all add up to something bigger. We know that people power is one of the most effective ways to ensure decision makers listen.
There's a growing chorus demanding that the integrity of our national institutions remain unblemished by divisive figures. To allow a Trump-owned course to host one of the world's biggest, oldest, and most respected golf tournaments would be to reward a divisive individual who condones war crimes and ethnic cleansing in Gaza and promotes racist, homophobic, and misogynistic messages around the world. It would signal support for a figure who ignores national and international law and undermines democratic values.
The outpouring of passion for The Open Championship shows how important it is to our national identity. We want to see the world's best golfers compete on the most magnificent links courses, unburdened by external distractions.
But the prospect of Donald Trump's ownership casting a shadow over the event threatens to wash that away. It hits at the very heart of what The Open Championship represents: unity, respect, and the sheer joy of the game.
Whilst the R&A rightly focuses on the logistical challenges of hosting such a massive event, these challenges pale in comparison to the potential damage to The Open Championship's reputation.
(Image: Trump Turnberry)
The news over the last week or so that Turnberry is even being considered, despite the R&A's previous stance on ensuring the focus remains on golf and not the owner, sparks anger among those who believe the sport should rise above political entanglement and divisiveness.
This decision seems unfair to the vast majority of people who simply want to enjoy the sport.
50,171 members of the public have told the R&A: Deliver on the promise of an Open that truly celebrates golf, free from the baggage of divisive figures, if you want to keep the trust of fans for generations to come.
With Donald Trump in the country for the next five days, the gravity of this decision is even clearer. The integrity of the Open Championship is on the line. Do the right thing. #Saynototrump.
Matthew McGregor is the CEO of 38 Degrees. To find out more about their work, go to: https://home.38degrees.org.uk/
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump wants to roll back $7 billion in grants for solar projects in low-income communities
The Trump administration is reportedly considering terminating a $7 billion grant program aimed at helping low- and moderate-income families install home solar panels, part of the White House's larger campaign to claw back billions in Biden-era climate spending. The Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of drafting termination letters to the 60 state agencies, nonprofit groups, and Native American tribes awarded the funding through the Solar for All initiative, part of the Biden administration's landmark 2022 climate law. The agency said Tuesday it has not made a final decision about the grants. Environmental groups say if Trump does go through with the cancellation, the effort will face legal challenges. Wiping away the grants would halt many projects before they were complete. The first Solar for All projects, efforts to install residential solar and battery storage systems for tribal communities in Montana and South Dakota, went online in October 2024. 'One in five households on reservations lack access to electricity, and this program was an opportunity to close that gap,' Cody Two Bears, the chief executive of Indigenized Energy, told The New York Times, which first reported on the cancellation effort. 'But those were just two kickoff projects to show what was coming for the next five years.' Critics of the Trump administration and climate experts said cancelling the grants, which were projected to serve about 900,000 people, would be bad public policy that hurts low-income families and the climate. 'Solar for All is laser focused on helping nearly a million low-income families afford electricity at a time when their bills keep going up,' Zealan Hoover, the EPA's former director of implementation, told The Washington Post. 'If the Trump administration is serious about energy abundance and affordability, then they should be working hard to accelerate — not terminate — these grants.' 'Solar for All means lower utility bills, many thousands of good-paying jobs and real action to address the existential threat of climate change,' Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who championed the program, said in a statement on Tuesday. 'At a time when working families are getting crushed by skyrocketing energy costs and the planet is literally burning, sabotaging this program isn't just wrong — it's absolutely insane.' In March, the EPA said it was terminating a separate pot of $20 billion in climate funding, prompting a legal challenge. In April, a federal judge issued an injunction siding with grant recipients. The administration's One, Big Beautiful Bill spending package, signed in July, repealed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, the single largest portion of climate money under the Biden law, and ordered any unassigned funds back to the U.S. Treasury. There is an ongoing legal battle between grantees and the federal government over the fate of much of the IRA's climate funding. Grantees say much of the funds were legally obligated before Trump took office and immune from presidential action, while the administration claims it claw the funds back.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
US judge blocks Trump officials from diverting disaster prevention grants
A federal judge blocked the Trump administration on Tuesday from diverting funds from a multibillion-dollar grant program designed to protect communities against natural disasters. US district judge Richard Stearns in Boston issued a preliminary injunction preventing the government from spending money allocated to the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (Bric) program for other purposes. Twenty mostly Democratic-led states sued the administration last month, saying the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) lacked power to cancel the Bric program without congressional approval. Fema is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Neither agency immediately responded to requests for comment. Created in 2018 during Donald Trump's first term, the Bric program helps state and local governments protect major infrastructure such as roads and bridges before the occurrence of floods, hurricanes and other disasters. According to the lawsuit, Fema approved about $4.5bn in grants for nearly 2,000 projects, primarily in coastal states, over the last four years. But the agency announced in April it would end the program, calling it wasteful, ineffective and politicized. Stearns said that while Fema does not appear to have since canceled grants, states should not have to wait to sue until after they lose funding, while the cancellation of new grants suggested Fema considered an eventual shutdown a fait accompli. He also said the states have shown a realistic chance of irreparable harm if the Bric program ended. 'There is an inherent public interest in ensuring that the government follows the law, and the potential hardship accruing to the states from the funds being repurposed is great,' the judge wrote. 'The Bric program is designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives,' Stearns added. 'The potential hardship to the government, in contrast, is minimal.' Led by Massachusetts and Washington, the 20 states that sued also include Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. The offices of Massachusetts' and Washington's attorneys general had no immediate comment.
The Independent
6 hours ago
- The Independent
Stanford University laying off hundreds due to Trump cuts
Stanford University is set to lay off hundreds of employees, citing 'changes in federal policy' under the Trump administration. The elite California private school laid off 363 employees last week, a university spokesperson told The Independent. The move affected roles across departments, including those working in administration, research, alumni relations and campus operations, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. 'The university is providing support resources as well as layoff benefits to eligible employees,' school officials said in a July 31 statement. 'Nonetheless, these are difficult actions that affect valued colleagues and friends who have made important contributions to Stanford.' The layoffs are the result of 'ongoing economic uncertainty' and 'anticipated changes in federal policy — such as reductions in federal research funding and an increase in the excise tax on investment income,' according to a letter from Stanford Vice President for Human Resources Elizabeth Zacharias reviewed by the Chronicle. President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' — which he signed into law last month — increased Stanford's endowment tax from 1.4 percent to 21 percent, the Chronicle reports. Stanford's $37.6 billion endowment is among the largest in the country. Stanford also lost a significant amount of federal research funding as agencies like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation are impacted by ongoing funding freezes, the Chronicle reports. Stanford has also been forced to make a $140 million reduction in its general budget for the upcoming year, according to a June statement from the school's president and provost. The school officials cited 'significant budget consequences from federal policy changes.' 'These changes include reductions in federal research support and an increase in the endowment tax,' the statement reads. The Trump administration has taken aim at higher education this year, and some schools have made deals with the administration to ensure federal funding isn't withheld. For instance, Columbia University in New York City agreed to pay the Trump administration a $200 million settlement last month to prevent funding cuts over claims that the elite school failed to combat antisemitism. Columbia University has not admitted wrongdoing and 'does not agree with the government's conclusion that it violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act,' according to a July 23 statement from the school. 'We are not, however, denying the very serious and painful challenges our institution has faced with antisemitism,' the statement continues. 'For these reasons, we took several important corrective steps in March, many of which are in this agreement, including a new provision for a liaison to the Jewish community, situated in University Life.'
