Trump threatens to block NFL D.C. stadium deal unless Commanders revert to 'Redskins' name
The American football team dropped the name Redskins in 2020 after decades of criticism that it was a racial slur with links to the US genocide of the Indigenous population.
Trump had called for a return to the name Redskins – and for the Cleveland Guardians baseball team to once again adopt the name Indians – on other occasions, but on Sunday he added that he may take official action.
"I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington," Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform.
The team moved from Washington to suburban Landover, Maryland, in 1997, but earlier this year reached an agreement with the local District of Columbia government to return to the city with a new stadium expected to open in 2030.
Trump has limited authority to intervene under the current home-rule law governing federal oversight of the District of Columbia, but he has raised the prospect of taking more control, telling reporters in February, "I think we should take over Washington, D.C."
Representatives of the Commanders did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Some fans have advocated readopting the name Redskins out of tradition, but leading Indigenous rights organisations have opposed the name, including the National Congress of American Indians, the Association on American Indian Affairs, and Cultural Survival.
At least one group, the Native American Guardian's Association, has supported the name Redskins and the "respectful use of Native American names and imagery in sports, education and public life".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
10 minutes ago
- France 24
Tokyo's Nikkei leads Asian rally after Japan-US trade deal
Investors were also cheered by news that Washington had reached agreements with Indonesia and the Philippines, stoking optimism that other countries will achieve deals to avoid the worst of the US president's levies. Despite a lack of deals being made leading up to Trump's self-imposed August 1 cut-off date, equity markets have been on the march in recent weeks on optimism that governments will eventually get over the line. Japan had been one of those yet to sign, despite a string of trips to Washington by trade envoy Ryosei Akazawa, dampening investor sentiment in Tokyo. But Trump said Tuesday that officials had agreed to a "massive" deal that would include a 15 percent tariff on imports from Japan, down from the previously threatened 25 percent. The pact also saw the 25 percent levy on autos -- a major export to the United States -- slashed to 15 percent. "We just completed a massive Deal with Japan, perhaps the largest Deal ever made," Trump announced on his Truth Social platform. "Japan will invest, at my direction, $550 Billion Dollars into the United States, which will receive 90% of the Profits." He did not provide further details on the investment plan, but claimed the deal "will create Hundreds of Thousands of Jobs." Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said that he needed to examine the deal before commenting. Akazawa wrote on X: "Mission accomplished." Traders poured back into the market, pushing the Nikkei up more than two percent thanks to soaring automakers. Tokyo and Mitsubishi rocketed around 12 percent and Nissan jumped more than nine percent. The yen strengthened to 146.20 per dollar -- compared with close to 148 Tuesday. The unit had already enjoyed a recent tick-up after Ishiba vowed to remain in office despite a devastating weekend election loss. Trump also hailed an agreement with Manila that will see the toll on Philippine goods lowered by one percentage point to 19 percent, while tariffs on Indonesia were slashed from 32 percent to 19 percent. Shares in Manila and Jakarta rose. The announcements boosted hopes that other deals could be in the pipeline before next Friday's deadline, though talks with the European Union and South Korea remain elusive for now. Still, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he would meet his Chinese counterparts in Stockholm next week for talks, as a separate mid-August deadline approaches for US levies on Beijing to snap back to steeper levels. Elsewhere in Asia, Hong Kong built on its 2025 surge to hit its highest level since late 2021, while Shanghai, Sydney, Singapore and Taipei were also well up. Seoul was flat and Wellington dipped. The advances came after a broadly positive day on Wall Street where the S&P 500 hit another peak but the Nasdaq snapped a six-day streak of records. Eyes are also on the release of earnings from Google parent Alphabet and other tech giants including Tesla and Intel. Key figures at around 0200 GMT Tokyo - Nikkei 225: UP 2.7 percent at 40,868.01 Hong Kong - Hang Seng Index: UP 0.6 percent at 25,287.68 Shanghai - Composite: UP 0.5 percent at 3,599.20 Dollar/yen: DOWN at 146.50 yen from 146.66 yen Tuesday Euro/dollar: DOWN at $1.1740 from $1.1755 Pound/dollar: DOWN at $1.3525 from $1.3532 Euro/pound: DOWN at 86.80 pence from 86.84 pence Brent North Sea Crude: UP 0.3 percent at $68.79 per barrel © 2025 AFP
France 24
an hour ago
- France 24
US court to decide if climate collapse is 'unconstitutional'
The case, Lighthiser v. Trump, at a Montana federal court is among the most high-profile in a new wave of US climate litigation That's the question a federal judge in Montana will weigh this September, as a group of young Americans sues the Trump administration -- arguing its aggressive fossil fuel agenda is not only accelerating climate change but violating their constitutional rights. Courts worldwide are emerging as tools for driving climate action against political inertia, with the International Court of Justice set to deliver a landmark ruling Wednesday. "It's very intimidating to think about my future," lead plaintiff Eva Lighthiser told AFP during a recent protest outside Congress, where she and other youth plaintiffs were joined by Democratic lawmakers. "The climate is very unreliable, it's destabilized, and it's going to get worse -- and that is a lot to reconcile with as somebody who's just entering adulthood," said the 19-year-old from Livingston, Montana. Eva Lighthiser, 19, of Montana, the lead plaintiff in Lighthiser v. Trump, said it was 'intimidating' thinking of her future due to the climate crisis © Alex WROBLEWSKI / AFP Their case, Lighthiser v. Trump, is among the most high-profile in a new wave of US climate litigation. It hinges on the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, which prohibits the government from depriving people of fundamental rights without due process of law. Twenty-two young plaintiffs -- including several minors -- are represented by the nonprofit Our Children's Trust. They are aiming to build on two recent state-level wins. In 2023, a Montana judge sided with youth plaintiffs who argued the state's failure to consider climate impacts when issuing oil and gas permits violated their right to a clean environment. A year later in Hawaii, young activists reached a settlement to accelerate decarbonization of the transport sector. Wildfires, floods, anxiety Now, they're targeting President Donald Trump's second-term executive orders, which declared a "National Energy Emergency." Trump directed agencies to "unleash" fossil fuel production while stalling clean energy projects. The suit also alleges the administration unlawfully suppressed public access to federal climate science. Mat Dos Santos, general counsel for Our Children's Trust, told AFP the conservative-dominated Supreme Court has shown willingness to hear "right to life" cases. "We're trying to make sure that the right to life really extends to living children," they said, "and that it means you have the right to enjoy your planetary existence." In an unusual move, 19 state attorneys general led by Montana have filed to intervene on behalf of the Trump administration -- a sign of how seriously the case is being taken, said Dos Santos. "Growing up in rural Montana, there's a lot of emphasis on our natural surroundings," said Lighthiser. Smoke-choked skies, relentless floods, and her family's climate-forced relocation have shaped her short life. In an unusual move, 19 state attorneys general led by Montana have filed to intervene on behalf of the Trump administration -- a sign of how seriously the case is being taken © Alex WROBLEWSKI / AFP She plans to study environmental science and says she struggles with anxiety and depression -- common among the plaintiffs AFP interviewed. Joseph Lee, a 19-year-old student at UC San Diego, said the threat of climate disaster has made him question whether he should start a family. Raised near an oil refinery in California, he suffered severe asthma as a child. His family briefly moved to North Carolina to escape the pollution, only to face worsening flash floods. Patrick Parenteau, an emeritus environmental law professor at Vermont Law School, said the case draws on the same constitutional logic as rulings on interracial marriage, desegregation, and -- until recently -- abortion rights. But while he supports it in principle, he doubts it will succeed. Long shot Judge Dana Christensen, who will hear the case September 16–17, has issued environmentally friendly rulings before. But even if he sides with the plaintiffs, the case is likely to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. "I think the plaintiffs understand that's an uphill battle, certainly with the Supreme Court we have," Parenteau said. "But the point is, they need to try." Other scholars are less sympathetic. Jonathan Adler, a law professor at William & Mary, dismisses such efforts as more geared toward public opinion than legal victory. Lighthiser v. Trump is "based on a very expansive and unmoored theory of what the power of federal courts is," Adler told AFP, calling it ungrounded in legal doctrine. He said more viable strategies include suing agencies over specific regulations or filing tort claims against polluters -- not sweeping constitutional challenges. "Climate change is a serious problem, and we should be doing more about it," Adler said. "But the sorts of legal strategies in court that are most viable aren't the sorts of things that are tailored for attention." © 2025 AFP
France 24
2 hours ago
- France 24
US Olympic policy change bans transgender women in women's events
A new note on the USOPC website regarding the participation of transgender athletes in sports says: "As of July 21, 2025, please refer to the USOPC athlete safety policy." The policy update, following US President Donald Trump's "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports" executive order, was added to the USOPC Athlete Safety Policy on its website as a new subsection entitled "Additional Requirements." "The USOPC is committed to protecting opportunities for athletes participating in sport," the addition reads. "The USOPC will continue to collaborate with various stakeholders with oversight responsibilities... to ensure that women have a fair and safe competition environment consistent with Executive Order 14201 (Trump's order) and the Ted Stevens Olympic & Amateur Sports Act." The Stevens Act, adopted in 1988, provides a means of handling eligibility disputes for Olympic sports and other amateur events. A memo to Team USA from USOPC chief executive Sarah Hirshland and president Gene Sykes on Tuesday obtained by ABC News and ESPN made reference to Trump's February executive order, saying: "As a federally chartered organization, we have an obligation to comply with federal expectations." Trump's executive order threatens to remove federal funds from any school or institution allowing transgender girls to play on girls' teams, claiming that would violate Title IX rules giving US women equal sport opportunities. The order requires immediate enforcement against institutions that deny women single-sex sports and single-sex locker rooms. "Our revised policy emphasizes the importance of ensuring fair and safe competition environments for women," ESPN quoted the USOPC letter to governing bodies as saying. "All National Governing Bodies are required to update their applicable policies in alignment." ESPN also said the officials noted the USOPC "has engaged in a series of respectful and constructive conversations with federal officials" in the wake of Trump's executive order. The move comes as Los Angeles awaits a host role for the 2028 Summer Olympics. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) also altered its policy for transgender athlete participation to limit women's sports competitors to athletes assigned female at birth after Trump's executive order.
