On March 11, 2026, a yearlong national boycott of Target—sparked by the company’s rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives—reached a dramatic crossroads. Pastor Jamal Harrison Bryant, a prominent Atlanta megachurch leader and one of the boycott’s chief architects, declared the protest officially over. Yet, as the dust settled, it became clear that not everyone was ready to move on. Local activists in Target’s hometown of Minneapolis and beyond made it plain: for them, the fight is far from finished.
The roots of the boycott trace back to early 2025, when Target, once celebrated for its vocal support of Black communities and DEI causes, began quietly scaling back several such initiatives. The timing was no coincidence—President Donald Trump had just returned to the White House and issued executive orders targeting what he called “illegal DEI” in both public and private sectors. Target, facing mounting political pressure, announced it would “stay in step with the evolving external landscape.” The move was met with swift backlash from civil rights leaders, church pastors, and community activists, many of whom accused the retail giant of betraying its post-George Floyd promises.
“We are claiming victory, and I believe that our generation needs to see victory,” Bryant said at a National Press Club briefing, according to Atlanta News First. “The reason why that is important is because our generation has only seen settlements.” Bryant’s campaign, dubbed the Target Fast, was modeled after historic economic protests in Montgomery and Birmingham, and it quickly gained traction. Over 300,000 people signed a pledge to boycott the retailer, and weekly protests were staged outside Target stores in cities like Washington, D.C.
The boycott’s demands were ambitious. Bryant’s group called for Target to fulfill its $2 billion commitment to Black-owned businesses, make $250 million in deposits at Black-owned banks, open retail training centers at historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), and reverse the rollback of DEI policies. Over the past year, Target has nearly completed its $2 billion investment in Black-owned businesses and more than doubled the number of Black-owned brands on its shelves. The company also added new representation to its board and launched a pilot program with an HBCU for job readiness and internships, which Bryant said will eventually expand to a dozen institutions.
But, as Ebony Porter-Ike, a spokesperson for Bryant, confirmed to USA TODAY, “There are no new commitments, no reversals.” Target’s leadership, including new CEO Michael Fiddelke, met with boycott leaders in recent months but maintained that the company’s actions were simply the completion of existing promises, not concessions to activist pressure. “Target is more committed than ever to creating growth and opportunity for all,” the company said in a statement provided to multiple outlets, including Axios and USA TODAY. “We’re pleased to be moving forward, and we will continue showing up as trusted neighbors while delivering results for our team members, guests, and the more than 2,000 communities in which we serve. Because when those communities thrive, so do we.”
Still, not everyone is satisfied. Nationally known activists like Tamika Mallory and Nina Turner, who helped organize the boycott alongside Bryant, continued to press Target for a public apology. “When will you state to our community the harm that you have caused and welcome us back—that you will accept it and do better?” Mallory asked at the press conference. She noted that while Fiddelke acknowledged the harm to Black employees and customers during an internal meeting, he has yet to take public responsibility. “To date, that has not happened,” she said, a sentiment echoed by Turner, who added, “I am not encouraging people to go back to shop at Target. Ultimately, people have to make their own decision. But as for me and my house, we will not be going back to Target.”
The sharpest criticism came from Minneapolis, where civil rights attorney Nekima Levy Armstrong and other local leaders have led their own boycott campaign for more than a year. “From the beginning, we said the Target boycott would be indefinite,” Armstrong told KARE 11. “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.” At a press conference outside Target’s headquarters, Armstrong made it clear: “This Target boycott is not over.” Jaylani Hussein of CAIR-Minnesota and Monique Cullars-Doty, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Minnesota, also pledged to keep up the pressure until Target makes concrete changes to its DEI policies.
Target’s leadership, for its part, has insisted that the company remains committed to supporting community organizations. In the last five years, Target has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to community efforts, including $100 million to Black-led organizations. The company says it will focus on strengthening its core business while continuing these partnerships. But as University of Minnesota marketing professor George John told KARE 11, Target’s sales woes predate the boycott. “It’s very difficult to find examples of individual boycotts that actually work unless they can gather support from larger institutions,” John said. “So in this particular instance, I don’t think any of those boycotts or controversies that Target has found itself in has gone beyond the groups supporting it.”
Indeed, Neil Saunders, managing director at GlobalData, told Axios that while the protest “has been unhelpful to Target” and likely had some impact, it wasn’t the retailer’s core problem. “Target’s sales were slumping long before the DEI situation,” Saunders said, noting that most shoppers don’t participate in boycotts—even if they agree with the cause. But the boycott did highlight the economic clout of Black Americans, who wield roughly $2 trillion in buying power, according to recent estimates. “Our dollars have influence and we have choices,” Mallory said. “The question now is not about Target. It’s really about us; what’s next, who’s next, and what do we intend to do?”
For Target, the end of the national boycott offers a chance at a reputational reset under CEO Fiddelke. But with local activists vowing to continue their protest and some shoppers still feeling betrayed, the company’s road to reconciliation remains uncertain. As Bryant put it, “It takes 30 days to create a habit and a year out, the onus of that responsibility rests on the shoulders of Target and how it is that they lure people back. A lot of people have figured out to do life without them.”
In the end, whether shoppers return to Target may depend less on press releases and pledges, and more on whether the company can rebuild the trust it lost—one customer at a time.