politics

A comprehensive list of all the brands that have binned Donald and Ivanka Trump.

Since President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries, American citizens have marched on the streets and taken to social media to protest.

They’re also hitting back with their wallets – and companies like Uber, Nordstorm, and Neiman Marcus are taking notice.

As a part of the #GrabYourWallet campaign, major retailers are refusing to stock Ivanka Trump’s clothing line and other Trump merchandise.

Nordstrom has officially said that it stopped carrying Ivanka Trump’s brand because of “declining sales”.

“Each year we cut about 10% [of brands carried] and refresh our assortment with about the same amount,” a Nordstrom representative told Business Insider.

“In this case, based on the brand’s performance, we’ve decided not to buy it for this season.”

But the retailer’s customers have been more than happy with the move, taking to social media to show their support for the company.

According to Business Insider, Neiman Marcus also appears to have cut ties with Ivanka Trump’s fashion brand.

Fifteen products from Trump’s jewellery line were available on the retailer’s website as recently as the end of January. Now, the products have disappeared.

Shoes.com, a Canadian online shoe store, ditched Ivanka Trump’s shoe line in November.

Fast Company recently reported that the shoe retailer said it was removing the Trump line in response to calls for a boycott against the brand.

 Belk, Jet, Shopstyle and Gilt have also stopped carrying Ivanka Trump’s clothing and accessory lines.

And it’s not just the big retailers who are pushing back. Influential tech companies like Uber, Netflix, Google and Apple have also spoken out against the ban.

Netflix CEO and Facebook board member Reed Hastings called Trump’s move “un-American.”

According to Bloomberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai wrote an internal memo, recalling employees that he thought may have been affected by the ban.

“It’s painful to see the personal cost of this executive order on our colleagues,” he wrote.

Apple CEO Tim Cook sent a letter to employees, saying his company “would not exist without immigration,” a reference to co-founder Steve Jobs’ Syrian heritage.

And Uber’s CEO Travis Kalanick issued a statement calling the ban “unjust” and pledging to create a $3 million legal defence fund to help drivers with immigration and translation services.

Most recently, Anne Mahlum, a Washington gym owner, has hit back at Ivanka for taking a class at her gym under an alias.

In an impassioned Facebook post she wrote: ““What you do when you find out Ivanka Trump just took [Solidcore], but used an alias to sign up for class? You reach out and ask for a meeting.”

“While I don’t know her and I always seek to understand … I do know her father is threatening the rights of many of my beloved clients and coaches and as a business owner, I take my responsibility to protect and fight for my people very seriously,” she added.

Meryl’s speech. Discuss. On Mamamia Out Loud. 

With #GrabYourWallet still trending, it seems like more and more American companies and their consumers will be putting their money where their mouth is and making a stand.

Related Stories

Recommended

Top Comments

Fe 7 years ago

I don't blame Ivanka for going to the gym under an alias. The woman can't so anything without criticism at the moment, surely she has the right to exercise in peace.

Les Grossman 7 years ago

It's always ok to bully when progressives do it. Like the Milo riot, people screaming fascist about him and vowing to have a mass burning of his book. When they act like fascists it's ok.

Fe 7 years ago

Its not ok, bullying is never ok but both sides do it and both sides like to point their finger at the other and say "but you do it too". I think you can find examples of horrible behaviour in both camps. It would be nice to see a bit less "them and us" and a bit more listening without the school yard nastiness.

Les Grossman 7 years ago

I agree it would be nice, but who divided up people and set them against each other in the first place? It wasn't conservatives who created BLM or Antifa or declared that white people are incapable of experiencing racism or men are responsible for all the worlds problems was it? The Democrats declare white
Males are sexist, racist Deplorables and then are utterly stunned when they don't vote for them. When they can't find real hate crimes, they just make them up over and over and when caught justify it as raising awareness because it has to be happening somewhere else.

I'm all for judging people by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin, that's an anathema to the Lefts identity politics of today.

shan 7 years ago

The Democrats are the only ones who 'just make [stories] up over and over'?

Aren't you watching the current car-crash of alternative facts spewing forth from the White House?


Les Grossman 7 years ago

As a private business, that's absolutely their choice, just as any bakery, dress maker or caterer has the choice to not provide services for a same sex wedding if it goes against their believes as well.

I just hope people are consistent.

hobart_girl 7 years ago

I don't think it's quite the same - the big retailers are generally making this as a business decision. If consumers aren't buying these products, why stock them? It makes sense from a business perspective, which is perhaps why it's odd that Trump (who believes himself to be a consummate businessman) is saying it is unfair. None of these retailers are refusing service to anyone, they're simply making business decisions about what to stock in their shops. But what you're saying is that it is the same as refusing service to a customer, which it genuinely is not. It would be if the caterer was refusing to buy their produce from a gay farmer or something, but refusing to sell to someone because of what they believe or who they love is in the other direction from consumer power and is discriminatory.

Les Grossman 7 years ago

A distinction of no difference if a baker refuses to vend for a gay wedding or a store refuses to vend one of their products.

If anything, the argument is stronger for a Christian bakery who is following beliefs than a department store trying to avoid controversy. One is defending their religious beliefs, the other is defending profits.

But ultimately it's just the old progressive standard, it's only bad if other people do what we do.