GOP AGs Warn Target Over ‘Offensive’ Pride and Satanic Products

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has issued a warning to Target, stating that their recent “Pride” campaign merchandise and donations may violate state child-protection laws. The letter also raises concerns about parental rights and fiduciary duties.

The letter points out that state child-protection laws penalize the sale or distribution of obscene matter, including items with sexual themes and material harmful to minors. It emphasizes that Indiana and other states have passed laws to protect children from harmful content that sexualizes them and prohibits gender transitions for minors.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Target for a response, but has not received one yet.

Attorneys general from six other states, including Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Carolina, have also signed the letter. These states have recently passed laws, some of which are currently in the courts, that prohibit cross-sex hormone and surgery procedures for minors. The attorneys general are sending a message to corporations doing business in their states to take notice.

The letter does not mention any legal action.

Contentious Merchandise

The letter highlights some of the products that Target featured in its “Pride” month campaign, such as LGBT-themed infant clothing, items from a Satanic brand, and “tuck friendly” swimsuits that sparked media coverage and backlash.

The attorneys also express concern about Target’s support for the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which trains members to create LGBT-related associations in K-12 schools. They argue that this support may violate parental-rights laws in their states, as GLSEN training materials encourage members to make gender identity decisions with students without parental knowledge.

The letter suggests that Target’s directors and officers may have been negligent in undertaking the “Pride” campaign, which negatively affected the company’s stock price. It also questions whether the campaign improperly directed company resources for political or social goals unrelated to the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

Following the backlash, Target’s stock dropped 17 percent, reaching a three-year low and resulting in losses exceeding $13 billion. Both Citi and JP Morgan Chase downgraded Target’s shares.

The letter concludes by stating that Target’s “Pride” campaign was not an example of excellence in retail and suggests that promoting pride in the United States would be more profitable and unifying.

Target Flip-Flops Under Activist Pressure

Target responded to the backlash by highlighting its history of stocking products celebrating Pride for over 10 years. It explained that some items were removed due to threats impacting the safety and well-being of its team members. The company reaffirmed its commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community moving forward.

In response, seven activist groups called on Target to return the removed items and release a statement reaffirming their commitment to the LGBTQ+ community within 24 hours.

Target ended up alienating both LGBT groups and its core customer base.

The attorneys argue that by ostracizing families, who are Target’s core customer base, the company’s board and management have acted against shareholder interests.

The letter states, “Those activists aim to advance social goals by exposing Target’s valuable customer base, which includes families with young children across the country, to ‘LGBTQIA+’ concepts and values. But Target’s management has no duty to fill stores with objectionable goods, let alone endorse or feature them in attention-grabbing displays at the behest of radical activists.”