On Friday, many people are expected to participate in a nationwide shutdown to protest Donald Trump’s administration and Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s targeting and killing of community members across the country. This shutdown encourages people to avoid going to school, work or spending money that day.
With the recent killings of Alex Pretti, Keith Porter Jr., Renee Nicole Good, Parady La, Heber Sánchez Domínguez, Víctor Manuel Díaz, Luis Beltrán Yáñez–Cruz, Luis Gustavo Núñez Cáceres and Geraldo Lunas Campos, a large portion of the country is outraged by the violence that U.S. Customs and Border Protection and ICE agents cause and the fear they instill.
In a desperate attempt to disrupt the system, moments like these force a frequented question into conversation: Do boycotts actually work?
The outcome of a boycott is often measured by whether the company changes its practices. In the past, firms such as Starbucks and Delta Airlines have conformed to demands following shareholder pressure caused by boycotts.
Boycotting is not a new tool for social change; people have long used their purchasing and working decisions as a form of economic protest.
Looking back to 1965, Filipino farmworkers in California stopped working to demand a living wage. United Farm Workers launched a national boycott, garnering support across different industries and driving down sales. By 1970, new contracts were made that improved working conditions and wages.
There are countless examples of successful boycotts throughout history, such as the Anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa, the Montgomery bus boycott and the Nestlé boycott.
There have also been more recent successes. In 2025, Tesla faced backlash and boycotts in response to Elon Musk’s involvement in federal spending cuts and deregulation in the second Trump administration. Tesla’s sales have since dropped by 8.6%.
This month, Minneapolis has caught worldwide attention when thousands of Minnesotans participated in an economic blackout to protest against ICE’s presence in the state. Activists have been focusing their efforts on boycotting Target and protesting on the store’s premises.
The day after Renee Good was murdered on January 8, ICE detained two Target employees in Minnesota.
Target stayed silent, refusing to make a public denouncement of the ICE agents’ behavior on their property.
If you know anyone around you may have stopped shopping at your local Target, it may be for this reason or a multitude of others.
Although boycotts can be effective, it is important to recognize the harm they can cause. They sometimes can unintentionally hurt the wrong people, resulting in workers losing their jobs or having lower wages.
In 2023, conservatives boycotted Bud Light after Dylan Mulvaney, an actress, comedian, and content creator, partnered with them for advertising. Anheuser-Busch, Bud Light’s parent company, lost $395 million in revenue and laid off 2% of its U.S. workforce.
It is not a privilege to boycott, but it is a privilege to work for a company that does not contribute to the ongoing atrocities. Another concern is that some larger corporations may also not feel a big impact on their finances.
However, this is not the point. The purpose of a boycott is to expose how our systems rely on uninterrupted participation. Discomfort is not a side effect, but a mechanism. Choosing inconvenience is a form of power.
Boycotts with greater media coverage create visibility to issues within our communities, which may be what we all need right now. Forcing internal discussions and public acknowledgement can create pressure that lingers.
With current and upcoming shutdowns, a single day of disruption is less important than the continued pressure and engagement that follow.
As students, faculty, and staff, you have the right to protest and show forms of peaceful action during these times. Although not sustainable for all, not going to class or work and keeping money in your pocket can be a meaningful way to participate in shutdowns and boycotts.
Maya DeHoyos can be reached at [email protected] or [email protected].


Ari Sorokin // Jan 30, 2026 at 12:29 pm
As long as this inconvenience does not include blocking roads, which could lead to the deaths of people who need to go to the hospital, and does not prevent people from going to work, this is all lawful.