Listed in this article are the companies to boycott
Part 1 of a Recurring Series: “Wallet Activism”
The message was unmistakable, crude, and contemptuous. On Saturday evening, October 18th, while nearly seven million Americans marched peacefully across the country in “No Kings” protests, President Trump posted an AI-generated video to Truth Social that left little doubt about his contempt for the movement demanding he respect the Constitution. The 19-second video showed Trump as a monarch who controlled a fighter jet named “King Trump” while he flew above New York City to drop feces on protesters who stood below. The video used Kenny Loggins’ “Danger Zone” (Kenny Loggins was not happy about that), the video was an explicit mockery of the very civic participation that democracy depends on.
This is not an exaggeration of his views. This is him stating them plainly. He is saying, without filters: I am indeed a king. I will mock you for asking me not to be. And I am reveling in your discomfort.
The rising numbers indicate that public concern continues to grow. The October protests brought out 7 million participants who gathered at 2,700 locations throughout the United States which exceeded the June protests by 2 million participants. The June “No Kings” protests attracted 5 million participants who created a massive turnout that surpassed all previous protests during Trump’s first presidential term in 2017. This growth represents a desperate escalation by millions of Americans who see their democracy under siege.
Yet the President’s response to this explosion of civic engagement was not to listen. It was to laugh. To film it. To defecate on it—literally.
Traditional Protest Has Failed
The administration has proven that traditional protest methods fail to produce any effect against its current policies. The number of protesters and their displayed signs fail to influence Trump’s decisions. The First Amendment protects peaceful gatherings, but Trump responds to them with contemptuous laughter. Trump responded to the biggest single-day protests in American history by creating an AI video which showed him dropping feces on the protesters. The President does not consider these citizens as people who need his approval because he sees them as opponents to defeat.
A leader who shows no interest in public opinion demonstrates this exact behavior. His response to millions of protesters in the streets consists of mocking them instead of showing any sign of consideration. The situation demonstrates a complete breakdown of the democratic system.
The people who back Trump at this point actively work to destroy democratic principles. They actively support the growth of authoritarian rule. Through their deliberate actions of voting, their supportive behavior and their decision to stay silent, they actively support the concentration of power in Trump’s hands who treats the Constitution as an obstacle. The people who support Trump now want a monarch to rule them and they are getting their wish.
The Real Leverage: Your Wallet
The economic power of citizens represents the only remaining force which can be used to fight against the administration. The Trump administration along with all other governments need money to operate, people to pay taxes and for businesses to run smoothly. The administration will face an insurmountable challenge when millions of Americans choose to leave Trump-supporting companies out of their economic activities.
The action does not involve any form of violence. The action does not involve any illegal conduct. The free market operates through consumer decisions which millions of people can use to achieve their goals.
Millions of Americans have established their opposition to authoritarian rule. The people need to execute this principle by making Trump and his supporters experience financial losses through their business operations. A consumer boycott aimed at companies that have surrendered to Trump’s agenda and tech billionaires who support him should be seen as a form of accountability rather than punishment. The free market operates as it should when consumers use their purchasing power to hold businesses accountable.
The companies and institutions listed below have either received federal funding contingent on complying with Trump’s demands or have voluntarily dismantled diversity and inclusion programs in order to curry favor with the administration—using taxpayer money as leverage and abandoning their stated values to maintain access to power and capital. They have made a choice. Now Americans can make theirs.
INSTITUTIONS AND COMPANIES THAT HAVE CAPITULATED TO TRUMP
Universities and Colleges (Funding Cuts/Agreements)
Harvard University
- The university received $2.2 billion in federal grants and $60 million in contracts which became frozen in April 2025 before a court restored partial funding, but the administration announced $450 million in additional funding cuts for May 2025.
- The annual cost for this institution amounts to $1 billion.
- The university faces funding reduction because of alleged antisemitic activities and DEI programs.
Concession: The university accepted a proposal to pay $500 million to regain federal funding while ending all investigations.
Columbia University
- The university received $400 million in frozen funding during March 2025.
- The institution reached a negotiated agreement with the Trump administration.
Concession: The university accepted a deal to give $200 million to the administration while implementing new policies which would restore their funding.
University of Pennsylvania
- The university received frozen funding amounts that exceeded hundreds of millions of dollars although the exact amount remains undisclosed.
- The institution reached a negotiated agreement with the White House.
Concession: The university reached an agreement with Trump administration officials about their transgender athlete policies.
Duke University
- Frozen/reduced funding: $108 million in federal grants and contracts (July 2025)
- Layoffs: 599 employees accepted buyouts; another 250 faculty members reportedly considering buyout offers
- Actions taken: DOJ investigation into alleged racial discrimination in hiring and admissions
Northwestern University
- The university lost $790 million in research funding when the Trump administration imposed a funding freeze in April 2025.
- The organization reduced its workforce by 400 positions which accounted for 5% of its labor expenses.
- The institution works to establish a deal with White House officials (August 2025).
Cornell University
- The university lost $1+ billion in federal research funding.
- The Department of Defense issued 75+ stop-work orders which blocked research activities in national defense, cybersecurity, health, cancer research, jet engine development, superconductor studies, space and satellite communication projects.
- The institution continues to work with White House officials to establish an agreement (August 2025).
Johns Hopkins University
- The university lost $800 million in USAID grants which became the largest single funding reduction.
- The university employed 2,222 staff members before their termination.
- The university lost funding because of USAID agency budget reductions.
Stanford University
- The university reduced its general funds budget by $140 million.
- The university reduced its workforce by 363 positions.
- The university announced a hiring freeze during February 2025.
- The university faces budget challenges because of federal policy changes and increased endowment taxes.
Boston University
- The university reduced its workforce by 1% of its total employees.
- The university faces budget challenges because of unstable federal funding and other financial difficulties.
USC (University of Southern California)
- The university reviews the Trump administration’s “Compact for Academic Excellence” which offers preferential funding through policy concessions.
- The university faces budget deficits and uncertain federal funding support.
Schools That Rejected Trump’s “Compact” (but still under pressure)
MIT, University of Virginia, Dartmouth College, Brown University
- The institutions refused to accept White House funding offers that required them to make policy changes.
- The institutions maintained their diversity-based admission standards and international student enrollment limits while rejecting all proposed ideological changes.
- The institutions continue to face funding restrictions and possible investigations despite their refusal to accept the White House offer.
Tech Companies and Major Corporations (Voluntary DEI Rollbacks/Capitulations)
Meta (Facebook, Instagram, Threads)
- The company eliminated all DEI programs starting from January 2025 which included hiring initiatives, training sessions and supplier diversity programs.
- The company eliminated fact-checking programs and modified content moderation rules to match Trump administration preferences.
- The company ended all DEI programs at the same time it changed its content moderation rules to match Trump administration preferences.
- The company’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg attended Trump’s presidential inauguration ceremony.
Amazon
- The company stopped all DEI programs when Trump won the presidential election in December 2024.
- The company eliminated its diversity recruitment targets during February 2025.
- The company eliminated diversity targets from its workforce even though it had established a goal to boost underrepresented groups in leadership positions by 30% by 2025.
Tesla (implied through Elon Musk alignment)
- The CEO Elon Musk serves as a key member of Trump’s inner circle and DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency).
- Musk has actively opposed DEI initiatives while maintaining his position as a leading figure in Trump’s administration.
AT&T
- The company took three DEI initiative steps by canceling programs and stopping training sessions and removing pronoun pins from employee guidelines and eliminating the Chief Diversity Officer position (March 2025).
Citigroup
- The company discontinued its DEI programs when it ended them in February 2025.
- The company made two major changes to its operations by stopping diverse candidate selection for new hires and renaming its diversity team to “talent management and engagement team” and removing “aspirational representation goals” from its goals.
KPMG
- The company removed its DEI reports from its website during February 2025.
- The company ended its “Accelerate 2025” talent strategy which worked to boost diversity in recruitment and retention practices.
Deloitte
- The company ordered US staff members to remove their pronouns from email communications while it discontinued its DEI program and annual diversity report.
UnitedHealth
- The company took down its DEI content from its website because it needed to follow new emerging laws.
Disney, McDonald’s, Ford, Walmart, Target, Lowe’s and John Deere
- Actions: Various rollbacks of DEI initiatives
- Status: Among dozens of companies that have publicly scaled back or eliminated diversity commitments
The Choice Before Us
These institutional choices affect real people in the world. Your money spent at these companies, your stock investments and service subscriptions represent your endorsement of their decision to surrender under political pressure. The market responds to value abandonment through political pressure because it does not impose any financial penalties on companies that discard their stated values.
The government shutdown enters its third week of operation. Immigration raids persist in operation. The administration has placed tens of thousands of federal workers into temporary leave status. The administration uses public funds to coerce institutions into submission because these institutions should maintain their independence. The institutions surrender to pressure because their customers will keep supporting them despite the difficulties of switching services.
The situation does not need to continue as it is. The power of consumers who unite behind a common goal represents the last available tool for change. The power cannot be dismissed by anyone. The power operates through financial terms which include profit and loss.
We have reached a critical point. The current situation requires millions of Americans to understand that their wallet votes hold the most significance in today’s political landscape. People need to decide if they will give up minor comforts to support different banks, search engines and social media platforms which oppose Trump’s values.
The administration demonstrated its willingness to use complete federal authority to enforce compliance. The corporations have decided to follow the administration’s lead by giving in to their demands. The time has come for us to take action.
The upcoming months will decide if American democracy will endure through the next four years or if we will switch to a new form of protest which carries greater weight.
_______________________________________
Sarah Mitchell works as a political analyst and democracy advocate who resides in Washington D.C. She produces written content about institutional oversight and grassroots activism. The article starts a continuous series which explores how consumers can use their purchasing power to create political change.