
Should The ‘Indians' And ‘Redskins' Names Return To Sports? As Stadium Vote Looms, Trump Believes So
Is this statement by the President a contrarian view? Or is it a reflection of a changing public sentiment?
CHICAGO - APRIL 30: Washington Redskins NFL football helmet is on display in Pioneer Court to ... More commemorate the NFL Draft 2015 in Chicago on April 30, 2015 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo By)
As the NFL's Washington Commanders seek approval to develop the RFK stadium campus and build out a new football stadium, they are set to hold public hearings on August 1st to hear the feedback of the community. With 520 people already slated to speak on Day 1, Mayor Muriel Bowser is urging D.C. residents to speak up in support of the project, which also includes commercial and residential development.
For residents who currently live in the neighborhood, there are two sides. While proponents lean into the positive and say D.C. will bring in just under $1 Billion a year in new business. Opponents are looking at the negative cost impact to the tax payers, and the need for even more housing and community investment.
Beyond those two sides of the coin, President Trump has another thought on his mind.
The team's name.
More specifically, bringing back the former name of the team, The Washington Redskins, which the team held from 1933 to 2020, as part of the approval deal. Today, they are known as the Washington Commanders.
'I may put a restriction on them if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington Redskins,'' President Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'I won't make a deal for them to build a stadium in Washington.'
While the President technically doesn't have a say, due to the land being transferred over to D.C. prior to his inauguration, (Congress passed a bill giving the District of Columbia more control over the 190-acre riverfront plot.) he does have a hand in both the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) and U.S. Commission on Fine Arts (CFA) — two federal advisory bodies that weigh in on all design matters in the city. They will have a big role in deciding what the stadium actually looks like. And with that, they have the potential to make the Commanders life very hard if the Presidents asks the appointees to stand tall.
Trump's social post continued "The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone. Cleveland should do the same with the Cleveland Indians.'
Washington Redskins logo displayed on a phone screen and photo of Donald Trump taken on June 25 in ... More The Hague displayed on a laptop screen in the background are seen in this illustration photo taken in Poland on July 21, 2025. (Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Those comments from the President were follow-ups to his previous Truth Social post, "The Washington 'Whatever's' should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team. There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams, with a storied past. Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen. Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them.
This type of language from the President, is the polar opposite of the social climate of 2020, when society was very vocal about pushing back on the Redkins and Indians names, deeming them 'culturally insensitive and inappropriate'. But this vote, and the Presidents post, has brought the topic of the Redskins and Indians back to light.
Why were the Redskins and Indians Names Replaced?
Only five years ago, the United States had a very different social perspective.
In the wake of the murder of George Floyd, a nationwide empathy-fueled movement took hold of America. Alongside the COVID-19 pandemic, consumers and corporations en masse began reevaluating, and revisiting everything within their control to see if they could be fairer and more empathetic.
For large-scale corporations, this moment presented an opportunity to review their moral compass as an organization. For two industries in particular, it meant examining the long-standing ethnic brand symbols on their products and evaluating them under a new lens.
Pennant promotes the Cleveland Indians baseball team (from the American League), Cleveland, Ohio, ... More 1950s. It features an image of the team's mascot 'Chief Wahoo.' (Photo by)
In sports, teams have had a long-standing practice of naming their mascots after Native Americans. Adorned on some of the country's most recognizable food brands are historically insensitive characters, known as 'food mascots'.
For them, 2020 would become the year of the 'great rebrand'.
In total, eleven college teams, two professional franchises and over a half a dozen food companies announced they were making changes to evolve or retire their culturally insensitive branding.
Across the grocery isles….
AUNT JEMIMA.UNDATED PHOTOGRAPH.
Across University Athletic departments from Midwestern State University to Quinnipiac University, mascots shifted. The Indians became the Mustangs, the Braves to Bobcats.
All of this leads me to the NFL's Washington Redskins and MLB's Cleveland Indians - the two most visible sports rebrands of this period.
The Washington Redskins, who were using the name and likeness of a Native American since 1933, became the Washington Football Team in 2020, before eventually landing on the name Washington Commanders soon thereafter.
The ownership group, up until then, had stated the team would "never" change its name, and argued that Redskins name honored Native Americans. But due to the climate in 2020, corporate sponsors, from FedEx to others, began being vocal about not wanting to associate their brands with the culturally insensitive name.
The Cleveland Indians changed their name to the Cleveland Guardians in November 2021. After decades of criticism regarding the team's previous name and mascot, Chief Wahoo, which depicted the face of Native Americans. In 2018, the Indians retired use of Chief Wahoo on their jerseys and hats. The new name, Guardians, was a reference to the "Guardians of Traffic" statues on the city's Hope Memorial Bridge.
Should There Be A Push To Revert The Names Back?
The name changes have sparked lively debate of fairness and sensitivity well beyond sports fans.
Did it not go far enough? The Kansas City Chiefs and Atlanta Braves weren't pressured enough to change their names, even though they are both native American references. Or, did the pressure of the time push the agenda too far, too fast only causing people to regret it later?
Cleveland fans, by and large would like the Indians names back. In a recent poll conducted in the city shows that fans overwhelmingly want the Indians name back, and the return of their mascot, Chief Wahoo.
In Washington, last year's winning ways for the franchise pushed their QB Jayden Daniels to have the #1 selling jersey in all of sports and Commanders merchandise skyrocketed 463% from 2023 to 2024. Once the playoffs began, the spike reached over 4000%. This success changed the sentiment with fans, pushing those who like it or love it to 50% warming up to the name.
LANDOVER, MARYLAND - DECEMBER 01: Jayden Daniels #5 of the Washington Commanders looks on prior to a ... More game against the Tennessee Titans at Northwest Stadium on December 01, 2024 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by)
Among Native American communities, the reactions are too mixed.
Groups such as Native American Guardians Assocaition, of fittingly abbreviated NAGA, have spoken out, the 'Redskins / Redmen is a Native American iconic name and is revered by the vast majority of Native Americans and general public alike. Redskins / Redmen represents honor, respect and pride for Native American culture. Redskins / Redmen is and has been a self-identifying term for Natives since the early 1800s.' according to thier website.
While on the other side, groups such as 500 Years of Dignity and Resistance which became a key organizer of the Indians name change and a leader in the ongoing protests of Native American mascots, had been long active in the continuous support of Indigenous Rights.
Moving forward, it's clear that consensus is still hard to find - and no one decision will make all happy. The court of public opinion holds power in this ongoing battle of what is right and what is not - it just depends on how society defines those terms at the time.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New Tariffs Threaten American Battery Production
Trump-era clean energy policies are slamming the breaks on the United States' battery war with China. While lithium-ion batteries were invented in the United States, China has been outpacing the nation in terms of both battery manufacturing and technological innovations. But while U.S. companies have been scrambling to keep up, gutted clean energy incentives and tariffs on critical materials have made a U.S. victory all but impossible. The domestic battery industry had been gaining considerable ground under the Biden administration thanks to major incentives including the sweeping Inflation Reduction Act. Tax credits, in particular, 'helped close the price gap between U.S.-made batteries and those made in China, the world's main supplier of lithium-ion battery modules, cells, and materials,' according to Canary Media. Realizing that the Trump administration would bring a less encouraging policy environment for clean energy technologies, makers of lithium-ion batteries promised the federal government that they would collectively spend a cumulative $100 billion by 2030 to build up an independent and totally domestic grid battery industry. In exchange, they asked for continued political support. So far, that plea seems to be falling flat. Just this month, the Trump administration accused Chinese suppliers of dumping graphite into U.S. markets – meaning that they are selling graphite more cheaply abroad than in their own markets. As a result, the United States has imposed a formidable 93.5 percent tariff on Chinese graphite. This could have immediate and serious consequences for United States batterymakers, as almost all refined graphite in the world comes from China. In fact, this tariff alone could 'easily add $1,000 or more to the price of a battery' according to the New York Times. As a result, the nation's once-thriving 'battery belt' is faltering. 'Projects are being paused, cancelled, and closed at a rate 6 times more than during the same period in 2024,' reports 'The Big Green Machine,' a site affiliated with Wellesley College that tracks domestic clean energy investments. And this biggest projects are the ones suffering most. Politico reports that 'prospects dimmed for 34 projects that are worth more than $31 billion and were expected to create almost 28,000 jobs.' This includes projects that are either paused, canceled, delayed by at least six faced by a slash in funding, or scaled down. But the overall impact of recent political shifts are still unclear, and overall the domestic clean energy sector is still growing. Related: 'The policies Republicans have passed are so recent that they may not have worked their way through the economy,' reports Politico. 'In the last three months, Congress has passed and President Donald Trump has signed bills that removed key tax credits, taken the teeth out of fuel-economy rules and neutered California's ability to force automakers to sell EVs.' Taken together, all of these compounding policy measures create an uncertain policy and investment environment at minimum. More likely, it will cause an extreme contraction of the domestic battery sector at a time when Beijing was already pulling away. "Unquestionably, the Chinese are ahead in manufacturing technology," Bob Galyen, a retired executive who worked with both GM and the Chinese battery giant CATL, told NPR. He says that Chinese battery research and development is receiving major influxes of cash at a time when U.S. manufacturers are struggling for funding. "Clearly, the U.S. is lagging behind,' he finished. Ironically, these measures are hitting Republican districts the hardest. The so-called 'battery belt' is mostly comprised of red states. As a result, according to Politico, 'GOP districts saw 60 percent of the funding decline, while Democratic districts saw 39 percent.' By Haley Zaremba for More Top Reads From this article on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
American Eagle Defends Sydney Sweeney Ad Campaign Amid Controversy: ‘Her Jeans. Her Story… Great Jeans Look Good on Everyone'
American Eagle is standing by its controversial ad campaign featuring Sydney Sweeney, which includes various commercials with the tagline: 'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.' The campaign creates a pun around 'great genes,' which ignited outrage online over American Eagle glorifying the Emmy nominee's white heritage and thin physique. Some users on social media even compared the ads to 'Nazi propaganda.' 'Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans' is and always was about the jeans. Her jeans. Her story,' the company said in a statement posted on social media. 'We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone. More from Variety JD Vance Urges Democrats Angry Over Sydney Sweeney Jeans Ads to Keep It Up: 'Continue to Tell Everybody' Who Thinks She Is Attractive That They're 'a Nazi' White House Says Liberal Outrage Over Sydney Sweeney's American Eagle Jeans Commercial Is 'Moronic' and a 'Big Reason Americans' Voted for Trump Katy O'Brian Says Sydney Sweeney 'Didn't Care' About Getting Hurt During Fight Scenes in Christy Martin Biopic: 'She Was Like, "If You Break My Nose, That's Fine"' Sweeney's American Eagle campaign caused so much chatter online that even Trump's White House weighed in on the backlash, with communications manager Steven Cheung calling the backlash a prime example of 'cancel culture run amok.' 'This warped, moronic and dense liberal thinking is a big reason why Americans voted the way they did in 2024,' Cheung added. 'They're tired of this bullshit.' Vice president JD Vance also mocked liberals for creating a hysteria around the American Eagle campaign, saying on an episode of the 'Ruthless' podcast: 'My political advice to the Democrats is continue to tell everybody who thinks Sydney Sweeney is attractive is a Nazi. That appears to be their actual strategy.' Vance continued, 'I mean, it actually reveals something pretty interesting about the Dems, though, which is that you have, like, a normal all-American beautiful girl doing like a normal jeans ad, right? They're trying to sell, you know, sell jeans to kids in America and they have managed to so unhinge themselves over this thing. And it's like, you guys, did you learn nothing from the November 2024 election? I actually thought that one of the lessons [Democrats] might take is we're going to be less crazy. And the lesson they have apparently taken is we're going to attack people as Nazis for thinking Sydney Sweeney is beautiful.' Even Stephen Colbert, who frequently speaks out against Trump and the White House, called the backlash against Sweeney and American Eagle overblown 'Now, some people look at [the ads] and they're seeing something sinister, saying that the genes-jeans denim wordplay in an ad featuring a white blond woman means American Eagle could be promoting eugenics, white supremacy and Nazi propaganda,' Colbert said this week on 'The Late Show.' 'That might be a bit of an overreaction.' Sweeney has yet to publicly comment on the outcry over the advertisements. Best of Variety New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week What's Coming to Disney+ in August 2025 What's Coming to Netflix in August 2025


Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
9th Circuit keeps freeze on Southern California ICE patrols
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a stinging blow to the Trump administration's mass deportation project Friday night in a fiery opinion upholding a lower court's block on 'roving patrols' across much of Southern California. 'If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion,' the panel wrote. The ruling leaves in place a temporary restraining order barring masked and heavily armed agents from snatching people off the streets of Southern California without first establishing reasonable suspicion that they are in the U.S. illegally. Under the 4th Amendment, reasonable suspicion cannot be based solely on race, ethnicity, language, location or employment, either alone or in combination, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong of Los Angeles wrote in her original order. 9th Circuit Judges Marsha S. Berzon, Jennifer Sung and Ronald M. Gould agreed. 'There is no predicate action that the individual plaintiffs would need to take, other than simply going about their lives, to potentially be subject to the challenged stops,' the opinion said. Fourth Amendment injunctions are hard to win, experts say. Plaintiffs must show not only that they were hurt, but that they are likely to be hurt again in the same way in the future. One way to meet that test in court is to show the injury is the product of a government policy. Throughout a hearing Monday, the appellate judges repeatedly probed that question, roughly doubling the administration's time to respond in an effort to get an answer. 'After the district court injunction here, the secretary of Homeland Security said, 'We are going to continue doing what we're doing' — so that's not a policy?' Berzon asked. 'The policy is to follow the 4th Amendment and to require reasonable suspicion,' said Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Yaakov Roth. Roth also rebuffed questions about a 3,000-arrests-per-day quota first touted by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller in May. In a memo to the panel on Wednesday, Roth clarified that 'no such goal' had been established. The court rejected that argument Friday, writing that 'no official statement or express policy is required' to prove one exists. 'Agents have conducted many stops in the Los Angeles area within a matter of weeks ... some repeatedly in the same location,' the opinion said, making the likelihood of future stops 'considerable.' The ruling scolded the Department of Justice for 'misreading' the restraining order it sought to block, and said it 'mischaracterized' Judge Frimpong's order. And it rejected the government's central claim that its law enforcement mandate would be 'chilled' by the district court's order. 'Defendants have failed to establish that they will be 'chilled' from their enforcement efforts at all, let alone in a manner that constitutes the 'irreparable injury' required to support a stay pending appeal,' the panel wrote. The case is still in its early phases, with hearings set for a preliminary injunction in September. But the 'shock and awe' campaign of chaotic public arrests that first gripped Southern California on June 6 has all but ceased in the seven counties covered by Frimpong's order: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. 'The underlying 4th Amendment law is not complicated,' said Mohammad Tajsar of the ACLU of Southern California — part of a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys challenging cases of three immigrants and two U.S. citizens swept up in chaotic arrests. 'Even a more conservative panel would have been concerned about what the government is doing.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, whose city was among a number of Southern California municipalities allowed to join the lawsuit this week, celebrated the news. 'Today is a victory for the rule of law and for the city of Los Angeles,' Bass said. 'Los Angeles will stand together against this administration's efforts to break up families who contribute every single day to the life, the culture and the economy of our great city.' The Trump administration has previously signaled its intent to fight judicial limits on its deportation efforts any way it can. It was not immediately clear where an appeal would proceed.