Mexico pushes Adidas for restitution in the huarache shoe controversy
The "Oaxaca Slip On" features the woven upper of Mexico's iconic huarache sandal paired with a sneaker sole. Chavarria's design, however, is made in China, prompting criticism in Mexico that the shoe uses the name of the southern state known for producing huaraches while sidelining local makers.
"Big companies often take products, ideas, and designs from Indigenous communities," President Claudia Sheinbaum said at her daily press conference. "We are looking at the legal part to be able to support them."
Deputy Culture Minister Marina Nunez said Adidas had already contacted officials in Oaxaca to discuss "restitution to the people who were plagiarized."
The dispute marks Mexico's latest push to defend traditional cultural heritage from appropriation by global fashion houses. The government has previously confronted brands such as Zara-owner Inditex and Louis Vuitton over the use of Indigenous designs.
Neither Adidas nor Chavarria immediately responded to Reuters' requests for comment.
Chavarria, born in the U.S. to a Mexican-American father and an Irish-American mother, has been celebrated for spotlighting Latino issues in his work, including a past collection referencing alleged gang members held at El Salvador's CECOT prison.
In an interview with Sneaker News, he described the Adidas collaboration as a tribute to his roots. "I'm very proud to work with a company that really respects and elevates culture in the truest way," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Feasibility without First Nations isn't feasible
Opinion Earlier this month, the governments of Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan signed an agreement to explore the 'feasibility of a new west-east pipeline to bring western oil and gas to southern Ontario refineries and ports.' In a news release, Alberta premier Danielle Smith said: 'By advancing a Canadian energy corridor from Alberta to Ontario, we are securing long-term energy access for families and businesses, creating thousands of jobs, and opening new doors for trade and investment, while strengthening our position as a global energy leader.' There's only one problem, and it's a big one: Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew didn't sign it. So much for feasibility. Since the federal government's passing of the One Canadian Economy Act (Bill C-5), which promises to expedite approvals for projects deemed 'in the national interest,' provinces have been rushing to position themselves with Prime Minister Mark Carney's cabinet in the hopes their regional initiatives and economic dreams will come true. Ontario has even passed its own version of the federal bill, in what is surely a move to speed up approval for the Ring of Fire critical mineral project despite Indigenous opposition. The challenge for all of this — if you can call it a challenge — has been Canada's legal requirement under Section 35 of the Constitution to attain 'free, prior, and informed consent' when it comes to including and respecting Indigenous and treaty rights. Simply put, few provinces have partnership agreements with First Nations to build economic projects and, for those that do, these were made after lengthy and costly court battles, negotiations, and conflict. The federal bill, Ontario's bill and the 'feasibility' agreement between Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario has no First Nations, Métis or Inuit approval. In other words, they are not worth much and are simply a cause for conflict. To be honest, development occurred much quicker when Canada was genocidal. Until the past five decades, Canada never had a legal duty to consult Indigenous peoples on the land, water, the economy, or frankly anything really — so, it didn't. Since the country's founding in 1867 (and arguably before that), Canadian legislators took Indigenous and treaty land, moved people whenever and wherever, and made unilateral decisions on Indigenous lives and families all the time. When law got in the way, other laws were passed under the justification that Canada's national interests were paramount. This meant that swaths of Indian reserve lands were taken whenever a company, corporation, or the military wanted. Or, that masses of Indigenous leaders were imprisoned, Indigenous women were stripped of rights, and children were taken. All this happened blatantly. A few kilometres from where Winnipeggers sit was the St. Peter's Indian Band, whose lands in and around Selkirk were taken illegally in 1907 while the community was removed to what is now Peguis Indian Reserve. The tide started to change in the 1970s, when Canada's Supreme Court recognized that Indigenous title (and therefore law, government, and rights) existed and Canada had to start to act justly, humanely, and with consideration of their humanity. Things were supposed to be different — but old Canadian habits die hard. From the One Canadian Economy Act to the actions of provincial premiers, Canadian leaders continue to act as if Indigenous peoples are an afterthought, using age-old arguments that Canada's 'national interests' are paramount. That is, until Kinew — who has not shied away from interest in lucrative land and resource projects — refused to join his provincial counterparts. 'In other parts of the country with other levels of government, there's the commitment to maybe push things through with legislation first,' Kinew told media, explaining his decision. 'That puts other partners on the back foot.' Don't be confused. When Kinew says 'other partners,' he means First Nations, Inuit, and Métis rights holders. What the premier is doing isn't because he's First Nations, it's because he's trying to follow Canadian law. History has proven it's a tremendous waste of time, money, and energy to exclude Indigenous rights holders from conversations surrounding land, resources, and, frankly, the country. The first and most important 'project in the national interest' is to include Indigenous governments at the outset of every single decision this country makes. Anything else is illegal. An unprecedented step however requires an unprecedented idea. For Kinew, it's a Crown corporation (on par with entities such Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Public Insurance) that can assemble Indigenous leadership to review and give approval of economic land and resource projects alongside provincial regulators. This 'Crown Indigenous corporation' would require buy-in and unity from Indigenous leadership — and seems to have almost immediately gained it. This week, the Southern Chiefs' Organization and the Manitoba Métis Federation came to an agreement to collectively 'advance economic reconciliation, protect Indigenous rights, and collaborate on major infrastructure and development projects across Manitoba.' That's no coincidence. That's First Nations and Métis holders on the front foot and reserving their spot at the table. Niigaan SinclairColumnist Niigaan Sinclair is Anishinaabe and is a columnist at the Winnipeg Free Press. Read full biography Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber. Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.
Edmonton Journal
3 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Canadians' view of leadership in Washington plunges: Gallup poll
In the wake of a stormy stretch in Canada-U.S. relations, the Canadian view of American leadership has plummeted. Article content Gallup's latest survey of Canadian opinion, conducted in May and June, found approval of Washington slipping to 15 per cent, statistically in line with sentiment when Donald Trump was president the first time. Article content Article content Canadian opinion of leaders in Washington has fluctuated over time, showing a clear connection with who is sitting in the White House. For example, Canadian approval of American leadership averaged 61 per cent under Barack Obama, compared with 19 per cent in Trump's first term and 41 per cent under Joe Biden. Article content Aside from an uptick in 2021, only a minority of Canadians have approved of Washington since 2017. Article content Article content The latest downturn comes in the midst of diplomatic and trade tensions. Since returning to the White House, Trump has introduced high tariffs and continued with rhetoric suggesting Canada should become the '51st state.' Article content Gallup asked about four global powers during it recent World Poll. Germany's leadership received the most positive ratings from Canadians. A slim majority of Canadians (54 per cent) approve of Berlin. Article content Canadians have a higher approval rating for Beijing than they do for Washington. It sits at 23 per cent, up eight points from last year's poll. Article content Otherwise, the 79 per cent of Canadians who disapprove of U.S. leadership is statistically close to the 82 per cent who disapprove of Russia's. Article content Meanwhile, Canadians' view of their own leadership has improved considerably, rising 19 points from last year to 59 per cent now. The increase followed Mark Carney replacing Justin Trudeau as Liberal party leader and prime minister in March and his election victory in April. Article content Article content Approval of Trudeau fell from 64 per cent in 2016 — his first full year in office — to a low of 40 per cent in 2024. Article content Article content However, Canadians are gloomy about the state of the economy. Their optimism dropped to a new low in 2025, with 27 per cent saying their local economy is getting better, compared to 63 per cent who think it's getting worse. Article content The share of Canadians who say it's a good time to find a new job has fallen sharply down from 74 per cent in 2022 to 32 per cent in 2025. This is the lowest level of job optimism since the COVID-19 pandemic started in 2020 and the 2009 financial crisis. Article content The housing affordability crisis also remains widespread in Canada. One in four adults are satisfied with the availability of good, affordable housing, compared with 72 per cent who are dissatisfied. Article content Weak economic sentiment poses a test for Carney, says the folks at Gallup. 'Sustaining public support may depend on whether his administration can reverse declining optimism and navigate a complicated relationship with Washington.' Article content
Toronto Star
4 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Trump tax law could cause Medicare cuts if Congress doesn't act, CBO says
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal budget deficits caused by President Donald Trump's tax and spending law could trigger automatic cuts to Medicare if Congress does not act, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported Friday. The CBO estimates that Medicare, the federal health insurance program for Americans over age 65, could potentially see as much as $491 billion from 2027 to 2034 if Congress does not act to mitigate a 2010 law that forces across-the-board cuts to many federal programs once legislation increases the federal deficit. The latest report from CBO showed how Trump's signature tax and spending law could put new pressure on federal programs that are bedrocks of the American social safety net.
