Breaking down the situation surrounding the Redskins name

What does Dan Snyder’s legal win mean?

With all this talk about the name change, one may remember a legal win struck by Dan Snyder in 2017, via the Supreme Court. In June of that year, the Supreme Court, per NBC Sports’ J.P. Finlay, struck down parts of a law that prohibited trademarks on offensive language. This, in turn, protected the Redskins name from a forced legal change.

This decision, at the time, was viewed as a near-terminal development in the Redskins name discussion. It was a statement that no matter how overwhelming the pressure became, Snyder could not be forced to change the name through litigation.

You might remember that Snyder celebrated that decision, as he had previously said he would NEVER — all caps — change the name of his childhood franchise. And you might be thinking to yourself, “What does Snyder’s legal win mean in this context?”

In the context of business, Snyder’s legal win doesn’t mean anything. The Supreme Court’s decision protected Snyder from the law, but not from the LLC’s. Just as Snyder has the legal right to maintain the trademark of the Redskins, other companies have the legal right to terminate their business relationships with Washington if they deem the name offensive.

We’ve already seen this slippery slope start to steepen its incline, as both FedEx and Pepsi have requested a name change from the Redskins, and have been pressured to cut business ties by their stockholders. We’ve also seen Nike pull their Redskins apparel from their online shop, a move that figures to be very significant, not on the legal circuit, but on Dan Snyder’s balance sheet.