Should Catholics participate in boycotts? Readers weigh in.

For our Sounding Board column, U.S. Catholic asks authors to argue one side of a many-sided issue of importance to Catholics around the country. We also invite readers to submit their responses to these opinion essays—whether agreement or disagreement—in the survey that follows. A selection of the survey results appear below, as well as in the September 2026 issue of U.S. Catholic. You can participate in our current survey here.

When Black activists organized a boycott of Target after the corporation abandoned its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in 2025, I was all in. I did not want to support a business that would change its stated values depending on which political party was in power. And I knew, as a biracial woman, that the businesses and employees most affected would be people of color.

I also knew that boycotts—which are collective actions of many people denying their business to a company—have been extremely effective. A prime example of this is the 1955–1956 Montgomery Bus Boycott, which literally changed American history. And just last year, a 2025 boycott of the Disney corporation over the suspension of late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel lasted only a week before it accomplished its goal of reinstating the show.

The Target boycott is not the only social justice boycott I have joined recently. I have tried to reduce or eliminate my spending at all businesses that flout environmental laws, exploit labor, or donate to organizations that violate human rights. As a Catholic called to protect the dignity of every human being, I am committed to advancing social justice causes through nonviolent action.

Catholic social teaching, in my opinion, supports this conclusion. Gaudium et Spes (On the Church in the Modern World) tells us that the economy exists to provide for the needs of humans and that economic activity “is to be carried on according to its own methods and laws within the limits of the moral order, so that God’s plan for [humanity] may be realized.” Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) also affirms that actions such as nonviolent labor strikes are “legitimate in the proper conditions and within just limits,” although they must not be abused “for political purposes.”

But, I have to confess, after almost a year of avoiding Target, I miss it. As a mother of four, it was a convenient place to get everything I needed without having to make multiple trips. I liked many of Target’s products, and it is the closest grocery store to my house. I also still fill my prescriptions at the in-store pharm­acy, so I’m constantly fighting the temptation to stroll the aisles. Even though I want Target to change its policies, I would really love it if that could happen without inconveniencing me.

The irony of this statement is not lost on me. Boycotts are built on inconvenience. They usually require long-term commitment. One of the most surprising things about the 2025 Disney boycott was how quickly it caused the company to change course. Most boycotts last months or years. The Montgomery Bus Boycott took 13 months and required Black folks to take the extra time to walk everywhere they needed to go. They had to fight the urge to take the bus when they were worn out. It was fortitude, not convenience, that ultimately led to change.

In my boycott fatigue, I am bolstered in my commitment by revisiting the church’s social teaching. I cannot help but remem­ber what Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his encyclical Caritas in Veritate (On Integral Human Development) that “every economic decision has a moral consequence.” The economy is not morally neutral, guided by invisible market forces over which humans have no control. What we do economically affects human beings locally and globally. As a consumer, it is my duty to understand this and act in accordance with my conscience. And actions like boycotting are morally necessary when we see injustice and immor­ality at work in our economic system. Catholics should be willing and able to commit to long-term economic action in solidarity with the least among us.

An example of this is the three-year anti-apartheid boycott organ­ized by female employees of the Dunnes Stores grocery chain in Ireland. Their refusal to sell South African grapefruit in protest of the oppression of Black South Africans launched a nation­wide boycott that included Catholic clergy and leaders and drew international attention to the fight for South African equality. In line with their faith and solidarity with other oppressed peoples, the predominantly Catholic Irish people shifted international discourse about justice and oppression of the marginalized.

Seen through this lens, boycotts are a way in which I can use what power I do have in the system for the good of others. And my action has not been in vain. Since the boycott started last year, Target has lost almost 10 percent of its foot traffic, and its valuation has decreased by $12 billion. The boycotts have exacerbated the impact of consumers opting for more online shopping, and while Target has not restored its commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion, it has been significantly impacted by collective action.

It must be said, though, that I am privileged to be able to take that type of economic action. My income, social location, and geographic location allow me to choose other stores and providers for the things I need. I am lucky to live in a community with the resources and connections to influence people in power. Many people live in food deserts, lack sufficient income to allow them choices in purchasing, or have low access to the resources I take for granted. When this is the case, I do not believe those people have the same moral or ethical obligations I do to take action. It would be unjust for me to expect that from people being marginalized by the system I am protesting.

If we’re honest, it would be hard to participate in today’s global economy if we completely boycotted every business that didn’t align completely with the church’s social doctrine. But, as Jesus himself says in Luke 12:48, from “everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required,” and I have been given many advantages. Looking at my individual situation allows me to see more fully the actions God is calling me to take.

This is ultimately the call to action for all of us. There is no single specific form of activism, such as a boycott or a strike, that every Catholic has to undertake. Instead, we are called to educate ourselves, pray, and discern where our actions might lead to a more just and moral society. It may be that we are called to other social action, such as choosing to purchase locally, protesting, donating to charities, or serving in our local communities. If we are owners or decision-makers at businesses, we might consider what it means to live the Catholic teaching that we are responsible to both other people and creation as we develop our business ventures. “[Humanity] thinks that [they] can make arbitrary use of the earth,” writes St. Pope John Paul II in Centesiumus Annus (On the Hundredth Anniversary of Rerum Novarum), “subjecting it without restraint to [their] will, as though it did not have its own requisites and a prior God-given purpose, which [humanity] can indeed develop but must not betray.”

For me, action has meant losing my beloved Target runs. For others, it means voting or community organizing. Each of us has our own unique path of living out discipleship and solidarity with others. The point is to respond to Jesus’ invitation to love our neighbor and care for the least among us through our daily lives and actions.

So let us ask ourselves, where is God calling us right now to see the least among us? Where can we act for their good? And how might the Holy Spirit transform us as we do so?

Results are based on survey responses from 143 uscatholic.org visitors.

This article also appears in the September 2026 issue of U.S. Catholic (Vol. 91, No. 9, pages 25-29). Click here to subscribe to the magazine.

Image: Pexels