USA 
United Kingdom
Is the resistance to anti-DEI policy weakening or, in fact, getting stronger? It’s hard to tell with latest update on one ongoing retail protest.
A year-long boycott of retail giant Target over its rollbacks to DEI initiatives has been declared over by some factions involved, without achieving any changes in policy.
The protest followed changes that emerged after the election of Donald Trump in 2025, when he implemented many sweeping changes through executive orders. One such change was an attempt to rid the federal government of DEI initiatives, which he called “wasteful” and “radical.”
Following Trump’s order, Target and multiple other retail companies announced that they would end certain DEI programs.
The corporate response triggered a wave of criticism and public reaction which, in turn, led to backlash and calls for boycotts, as consumer-led boycotts became increasingly prevalent in response to the president's second term in office.
One of those campaigns was led by the Rev. Jamal Bryant of Georgia, who said that the company had retreated from commitments made after the murder of George Floyd.
DEI protest declared over
Now, Bryant and other community leaders have said that their protest is over following a series of conversations with representatives of the retail giant, including the new CEO, Michael Fiddelke.
Fiddelke succeeded Brian Cornell as CEO in February of this year. Cornell was CEO of the Target Corporation for more than a decade and now serves as the executive chair of Target’s Board of Directors.
The decision to end the boycott came without any new policy change from the retailer. A spokesperson for Rev. Jamal Bryant of Georgia told USA Today: “There are no new commitments, no reversals."
Despite that, Bryant indicated that engagement with the company had produced some movement in discussions around opportunity and advancement.
“They have a program called Belonging, which gives access to everybody, not just for entry-level positions, but to be able to ascend into C-suites," Bryant told USA Today.
“It is essentially DEI as I read it. It is the exact same thing,” he said.
A Target spokesperson previously told Newsweek that it is "absolutely dedicated to fostering inclusivity for everyone."
Activists split over DEI boycott strategy
Even as one boycott campaign ended, criticism of Target’s DEI decision continued from other activists.
Nekima Levy Armstrong, founder of the Racial Justice Network, held a press conference in front of the company’s Minneapolis headquarters on March 11, where they distanced themselves from Bryant’s announcement.
“This Target boycott is not over,” Armstrong said.
Armstrong reiterated this in a post shared to Facebook. “Please don’t believe the hype and these attempts to rescue Target from the effects of capitulating to the Trump Administration. Target rolled back DEI because of Donald Trump,” she wrote, adding “The nationwide boycott of Target is successful and it will continue. Please continue to shop elsewhere.”
Armstrong also challenged the decision to declare victory without policy change. At a press conference she said: “How can you call off a boycott focused on diversity, equity and inclusion and have no results to show for it? That is a slap in the face for the people.”
Meanwhile, John Schwarz, founder of The People's Union USA, which regularly organizes and calls for consumer-led boycotts, has previously called for a “permanent boycott of Target.”
The split illustrates the pressure companies face when DEI decisions intersect with national politics and consumer activism. The original protest may have ended for one organizing group, though other campaigns remain active.
Boycott action organized by other groups remains ongoing.
While the boycott was triggered by the rollback of DEI programs, Bryant’s reference to Target’s “Belonging” initiative suggests that the debate is increasingly moving toward reframing rather than outright abandonment of diversity strategies.
It raises the question of whether companies are genuinely stepping back from DEI or simply repositioning it under broader inclusion language. One recent commentator referred to it as ‘strategic hibernation.’
At the same time, the split between boycott organizers points to a deeper divide in how those changes are interpreted. Some activists appear willing to accept revised approaches if access and advancement opportunities remain intact, while others view the rollback itself as evidence that companies are retreating under political pressure.
Changes to DEI policy may not end the conversation but instead shift the battleground to how those policies are defined, communicated, and understood.
