Target Faces Escalating Boycotts as Stores Become Focus of Twin Crises in Minnesota

Minnesota’s retail landscape is being reshaped by converging pressures on Target, one of the state’s most visible corporate employers. The retail giant now faces mounting calls for customers to boycott stores as community members mobilize against what they view as contradictory corporate practices and inadequate responses to recent events. With 17 Fortune 500 companies headquartered in Minnesota—including UnitedHealthcare, 3M, and Best Buy—Target’s challenges carry outsized symbolic weight in the state’s business community.

Employee Detention Reignites Community Outcry

On January 8, two U.S. citizen Target employees were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents while working at a store in Richfield, Minnesota. Video footage of the incident circulated rapidly across social media platforms, generating widespread attention and sparking fresh criticism of the retail chain. This development proved particularly damaging because it arrived amid existing tensions between Target and community advocates over the company’s handling of social justice commitments.

One week later, on January 15, over 100 clergy members and community organizers assembled at Target’s downtown Minneapolis location to demand action. Their requests included a public statement opposing ICE operations in Minnesota, a commitment to deny ICE agents entry without judicial warrants, and calls for Congress to defund ICE operations. Organizers report that CEO Brian Cornell agreed to meet with protest representatives, though details of any such conversation remain undisclosed.

Target has maintained silence on the matter. The company declined to comment when contacted about the Minnesota boycott effort or the criticism it faces. However, according to Bloomberg, Chief Human Resources Officer Melissa Kremer sent an internal memo informing employees that security teams are intensifying outreach to Minneapolis staff about potential disruptions. Some employees have expressed fear about coming to work, while others have used internal Slack channels to voice frustration over the company’s lack of public response to ICE operations in stores.

The DEI Reversal: From Advocate to Target of Criticism

Target’s current predicament is partially rooted in decisions made over the past year regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Following George Floyd’s killing in Minneapolis in 2020, CEO Brian Cornell emerged as a vocal champion of DEI efforts. Target became known for supporting Black and LGBTQ+ communities, businesses, and causes. The company committed $2 billion to Black-owned small business development and launched initiatives targeting historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) through its “HBCU, Always” program.

However, this posture shifted following Donald Trump’s 2024 election. The company discontinued its three-year DEI objectives, withdrew from external diversity assessments, and began stepping back from public commitments. This reversal prompted backlash that predated the recent ICE incident. In April, Cornell met with civil rights figures including Rev. Al Sharpton and Atlanta pastor Jamal Bryant, who articulated specific demands: opening Target stores on 10 HBCU campuses, fulfilling the $2 billion Black business commitment, restoring original DEI hiring and promotion targets, and investing $250 million in 23 Black-owned banks.

While Target has not formally agreed to these demands, the company continues collaborating with organizations like the Russell Innovation Center for Entrepreneurs and maintaining HBCU programming. Yet these efforts appear to have generated insufficient visibility among critics and community stakeholders.

Profit Pressures: More Than Just the Boycott Effect

Target’s financial performance has deteriorated significantly, presenting a more complex picture than boycott effects alone. For the quarter ending November 1, the company reported a 19% decline in profits, with earnings falling to $689 million. The timing of this decline—overlapping with initial DEI-related boycott calls—initially suggested a direct causal relationship.

However, retail analyst Neil Saunders from GlobalData offers a more nuanced assessment. He argues that while Target’s communication around its DEI policy shift was inadequate and should have emphasized ongoing commitments to small businesses and charitable causes, the profit decline reflects multiple contributing factors. According to Saunders, the boycott represents only one element in a broader performance crisis.

Inventory Woes Compound Corporate Challenges

The more fundamental challenge, Saunders contends, stems from deteriorating in-store customer experience. Target has struggled with chronic out-of-stock conditions that discourage store visits and reduce customer spending. During a Fourth of July visit, Saunders documented these problems with 15 LinkedIn photos depicting empty and disorganized shelves—a stark visual representation of operational breakdown.

Target acknowledges these inventory management challenges and claims to be implementing solutions. During the company’s third-quarter earnings call in November, Chief Operating Officer Michael Fiddelke—who will assume the CEO role—told analysts that Target is investing in machine learning and advanced technology to improve inventory management. Fiddelke stated that “these efforts are helping us move inventory more efficiently, increase reliability for everyday essentials, and further improve stock levels.”

Despite these investments and stated commitments, inventory issues have persisted throughout the past year. Consumer behavior has shifted accordingly, with customers becoming more selective about discretionary spending and increasingly willing to shop at competing retailers. This operational weakness appears to be driving store traffic declines more directly than the boycott itself.

Community Mobilization and Demands for Accountability

The convergence of DEI policy concerns and ICE operational presence has galvanized Minnesota’s faith and community leadership. Beyond the January 15 demonstration at Target’s flagship store, organizing efforts continue to pressure the company into specific commitments. Community demands extend beyond the ICE-related requests to encompass broader accountability for social commitments.

According to Saunders, Target’s self-perception as a community-focused retailer creates particular vulnerability to community mobilization. In this context, providing platforms for community voices to express concerns becomes strategically important. While some community members may view any corporate response as insufficient, Saunders notes that broader consumer sentiment remains more diffuse—most customers maintain political neutrality regarding retail choices, even when holding personal political opinions.

Strategic Silence: Target’s Risky Communication Approach

Target’s communication strategy presents a critical vulnerability. While internal discussions with employees about ICE-related concerns may be appropriate and measured, the absence of clear public positioning on community demands creates a communication vacuum that critics exploit. The company’s silence stands in contrast to the volume of community organizing and employee concern.

Saunders observes that Target views community relationships as central to its retail identity. However, translating this identity into concrete action during crisis moments remains challenging. Some stakeholders will likely view any corporate statement as inadequate regardless of content. The company must navigate between appearing responsive to legitimate community concerns while avoiding actions perceived as politically divisive by other customer segments.

As stores continue to become focal points for boycott calls and community organizing in Minnesota, Target faces mounting pressure to articulate both its values and its operational commitments more clearly. The convergence of policy concerns, operational challenges, and community mobilization creates a multifaceted crisis requiring coordinated corporate response across communication, operations, and community relations strategies.