14 Food Brands And Chains That Have Faced The Biggest Boycotts In US History

The first food-related boycott in American history was in the late 1700s, when colonists refused to buy British imports like tea and sugar to protest being taxed by Great Britain without representation in Parliament. This boycott culminated in the famous Boston Tea Party, which eventually led to the American Revolution. With the success of that boycott eventually culminating in independence from Great Britain, it's no wonder that boycotts have remained part of the country's fabric.

As the country developed big food brands and chains, it was inevitable that Americans would eventually use boycotts to protest companies that acted against our ethical and political standards. Boycotts against big food companies began in the 1960s and continue today, with many ongoing for years — here are the biggest. 

The earliest boycott on our list started in 1966. For some, it ended in 1987, but for others, it tainted the idea of buying from Coors forever. One boycott reason was related to worker discrimination, with the company seeming to favor straight white males over females, non-whites, or LGBTQ individuals. Liberals and the LGBT community weren't thrilled that the Coors family gave money to conservative politicians and groups. Plus, the company wasn't big on labor rights.

The boycotts began in 1966 to protest how the company treated Hispanic workers. The company was accused of giving Hispanics the worst jobs at lower wages and of firing based on race. Many Hispanics also boycotted Coors because the company supported grape growers, rather than often-Hispanic workers in the concurrent United Farm Workers grape boycott. There were active protests against Coors across Colorado in the 1960s, including on university campuses, and the protests and boycott soon extended to other states. The boycotts grew in the 1970s, with strikes and calls to end polygraph tests and embrace union workers.

The company stopped discriminating based on sexual orientation in 1979. Then, the boycott officially ended in 1987 when Coors came to an agreement with the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations and started hiring more women and minorities.

The Nestlé boycott that began in 1974 was related to how the company was marketing its baby formula in developing countries. After World War II, fewer people in developing countries were breastfeeding, which seemed to correlate with higher rates of malnutrition and death in infants. A big problem turned out to be that companies like Nestlé were marketing their formula in countries where families were forced to make the formula with dirty water and to families who may not be able to read the instructions or who were diluting the formula because they couldn't afford enough to sustain their babies' health.

Nestlé was among four companies brought before the U.S. Senate to testify in 1978, which brought the issue and boycotts more into the limelight in the U.S. The World Health Organization created regulations for how baby formula should be marketed in developing countries. Nestlé was the first company to adopt it in 1982 and refine it in 1984, which appeased most concerns and brought the boycott to an end.

The National Organization for Women (NOW) began boycotting Domino's Pizza in 1989 and pulled in several other organizations, especially in Michigan. There were several reasons for the boycott, chief among which was Domino's donations to pro-life causes.

A main complaint was that the president and sole stockholder of the company, Thomas Monaghan, financially supported ending tax-funded abortions in Michigan. Other groups that joined the boycott wanted to stop Domino's Farms Corp. from constructing a golf club community with a negative social and environmental impact. The boycotters also wanted Domino's and Monaghan to stop giving money to the Word of God cult, pull its involvement with right-wing organizations in Central America, prevent Tiger Stadium from being moved out of Detroit, stop anti-union practices, and end discriminatory employee regulations.

In 1994, Domino's released a statement that said that the company president wouldn't be giving money to any more anti-abortion groups. Later, for anyone still boycotting the chain, the company placed a statement on its website stating that it has never supported pro-choice or anti-abortion organizations. While it's true that Domino's itself had never supported a pro-life group, Monaghan's sole stockholder status meant that Domino's pizza sales had supported the cause.

The Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) was formed in 1993 to gain better wages and protections for farm workers, finally finding success with its boycott of Taco Bell in 2001. Since the 1980s, Florida farm workers picking tomatoes for the chain had only been making 1.2 to 1.5 cents per pound and only around $5,000 to $7,500 per year. Taco Bell was the first major fast food chain that CIW boycotted, and the boycott was immensely successful.

After a few years of boycotting, Taco Bell finally signed the Fair Food Agreement with CIW in 2005 that would meet farm workers' demands for better pay and working conditions in Florida. Workers would make a penny more per pound, suppliers would be subjected to a code of conduct, and suppliers would gain incentives for providing better worker rights.

The Wendy's boycott began in 2016 to pressure it to sign the Fair Food Agreement that Taco Bell signed in 2005. With Taco Bell leading the way for companies joining the Fair Food Program, there were numerous protests urging other companies to sign the Fair Food Agreement in favor of farm workers' rights. Other top chains like McDonald's, Burger King, Whole Foods, Subway, Trader Joe's, Chipotle, Fresh Market, and even Walmart ultimately signed. Because Wendy's has continued to resist, you'll still see The Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) protesting there occasionally.

To avoid signing the agreement, Wendy's switched to buying its tomatoes from Mexico, where the workers aren't guaranteed any rights. Wendy's addresses the boycott on its website, saying that it doesn't want to pay fees to CIW on top of the money it pays tomato pickers. During the winter, it says that it continues to get tomatoes from Mexico but gets them from other states in the U.S. in warmer months — just not Florida. While Wendy's talks about visiting the farms that provide its produce to ensure worker safety and human rights, it doesn't mention whether or not its farm workers are being paid fairly.

The Gorton's Seafood boycott of 2005 and 2006 was related to its parent company's connection to the whaling industry. In the 1980s, the International Whaling Commission led a global effort to stop commercial whaling, joining conservation efforts to help recover whale numbers and prevent their extinction. However, Nissui Company continued to sell canned whale meat in Japan that it purchased from Japanese government-funded scientists after completing their studies.

It was in 2005 that Nissui-owned Sealord Tuna was turned down for dolphin-safe certification because of Nissui's whaling practices, resulting in a Sealord boycott in Australia and New Zealand. Nissui also owns Gorton's Seafood in the U.S., and Greenpeace and the Humane Society urged a Gorton's boycott in the U.S. as well.

The boycott went beyond just an email campaign and asking people to refuse to eat Gorton's Seafood products. Greenpeace and Sea Shepherds actually put boats between Nissui's harpoons and the whales, which cut into its whaling profits. While Japan's government scientific whaling scheme continued, by March 2006, Nissui announced that it would cease its whaling activities and stop selling canned whale meat.

Many people have never forgotten Chick-fil-A's connection to anti-homosexual sentiments starting in 2011 and haven't eaten at the chain since. The chain is well-known for its conservative-Christian leanings, especially since it closes on Sundays. However, adding ethical stances concerning sexuality to the mix didn't sit well with many customers.

The whole thing started when a Pennsylvania Chick-fil-A supported a marriage seminar run by a notoriously anti-homosexual group. Suddenly, the chain's official stance on homosexuality came to the forefront, causing people to boycott the chain. While the company's president, Dan T. Cathy, stated in 2011 that the company intended to serve everyone and treat them with equal respect, he went on to admit in a 2012 radio interview that he supported traditional Biblical marriages and felt that non-Biblical marriages invited God's judgment. Furthermore, the Cathy family and Chick-fil-A's parent company, WinShape Foundation, were found to have donated millions to combat same-sex marriage.

It wasn't long before outraged customers held National Same Sex Kiss Day at Chick-fil-A, which the opposition countered with a Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. The Jim Henson Company also pulled all its kids' meal toys in protest. While the company says it's currently committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion, many people actively boycott the chain and oppose the opening of new locations in their vicinity.

Many people have been duped into thinking ultra-processed food was healthy, which is a big reason behind the Kellogg's boycott. GMO-Free USA was the organization responsible for starting the Kellogg's boycott in 2012 with accusations of the company "greenwashing" and "healthwashing" its products — essentially, making them look more environmentally friendly and healthy than they really are.

An example of greenwashing is how a box of Kellogg's Froot Loops promises vitamins, minerals, fiber, natural fruit flavors, and "whole grains" while being an ultra-processed product full of chemicals and sugar. The company has even hired registered dietitians to promote Frosted Mini Wheats on social media as being healthy, despite having 12 grams of sugar per serving.

Kellogg's didn't help its cause when, in 2012, it spent $790,700 to prevent GMO labeling requirements in California. GMO-free America worries that not all GMO ingredients are proven safe, but that seems to fall under the category of GMO myths since U.S. agencies are regulating the safety of most GMOs. However, the boycott continues since the company promised to stop using toxic, potentially cancer-causing glyphosate pesticides in its wheat and oats in 2020, but reports suggest it has been slow or inconsistent. 

The Oreo boycott that started in 2015 was triggered by misleading statements made by Donald Trump during his presidential campaign. For months, Trump repeated the same story during his campaign speeches across the U.S. that, despite his love for Oreos, he'd never eat them again because the Chicago factory was closing down and moving all Oreo production and 1,200 jobs to Mexico.

Despite getting the details wrong, there was enough truth to the story to be worthy of a boycott. Mondelez International did close down nine Nabisco lines in its Chicago Nabisco facility, affecting the jobs of 600 people (not 1,200). While the Chicago factory did stay open, it would no longer make Oreos. Meanwhile, the company was adding four lines to an existing factory in Mexico, where it would be making more Nabisco products, including more Oreos. The decision to move more production to Mexico was made because production was millions of dollars cheaper there per year. With Oreos still being made in the U.S. at three other facilities, not all U.S.-bought Oreos are currently Mexican-made. However, you can still feel upset that many are.

Then-President Donald Trump was also responsible for the Starbucks boycott from 2015 to 2017 over its holiday cup. The company released a plain red holiday cup, which seems like a fairly inoffensive choice. However, Trump blew up the move as being part of the supposed war on Christmas and said he might boycott Starbucks as a result. Former evangelist Joshua Feuerstein then posted to his 1.8 million followers on Facebook that the reason Starbucks debuted a plain red cup that year was that they hated Jesus.

In previous years, Starbucks cups had released a variety of winter- and Christmas-themed cups featuring images like reindeer, ornaments, snowflakes, and snowmen. So, not every year's theme was specifically Christmas-oriented, but none had ever featured Jesus.

Starbucks indicated that all it was doing in 2015 was allowing customers to personalize their cups. The boycott didn't end until 2017 when the holiday cup featured Christmas-inspired items again, like a Christmas tree and presents. However, it never released a Christian cup.

If you want a reason to keep boycotting Starbucks and add Nestlé to the mix, then you may want to look at all the ways Nestlé has been villainized, making Starbucks guilty by association. The boycott is largely about water abuse, but also about other problems like overexploitation in the palm oil and cocoa industries. The Starbucks boycott got added to the Nestlé one when Starbucks made a multi-billion-dollar deal with the company.

Water consumption is a major part of the problem. Nestlé has been accused of extracting large amounts of water from declining springs and a California forest in the middle of a drought.

Further accusations include environmental exploitation and child labor in its palm and cocoa production. However, the 2025 lawsuit against Nestlé and other chocolate companies concerning child labor in its Ivory Coast farms said it couldn't specifically link child labor with Nestlé chocolate. Plus, the company has worked to provide education and eliminate child labor in its production communities.

The 2023 boycott against Bud Light moved the brand out of its place as America's favorite beer. The controversy started when the brand partnered with a transgender social media influencer for an ad campaign. Ultimately, the boycott would cause backlash against the company from both conservatives and liberals.

When transgender personality Dylan Mulvaney promoted Bud Light via social media videos, the partnership ruffled the feathers of a variety of conservatives. The video focused on a $15,000 giveaway connected to March Madness, while also detailing Mulvaney's transition and showcasing the personalized Bud Light can the company had sent with Mulvaney's image on it. Suddenly, there were conservative politicians and celebrities striking back on social media, accusing Bud Light of having "woke" liberal advertising. It wasn't long before conservatives were urging a Bud Light boycott.

When Bud Light first officially addressed the boycott, it didn't apologize for its choice, mentioning its partnership with influencers that represent a variety of demographics that enjoy its beers. However, by the end of the month, two of the company's marketing executives were gone, drawing criticism from liberals this time around. With both sides of the political spectrum upset, sales numbers weren't quick to recover.

Several food brands have been boycotted because of their connection or supposed connection to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These boycotts were mainly enacted in 2023 or 2024, often started by or supported by the Palestinian BDS National Committee, which uses boycotts to resist the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

The boycotts tend to relate to companies that support Israel or maintain factories in Israeli-occupied areas. The boycotts against Coca-Cola and SodaStream were both related to maintaining factories in Israeli-occupied areas. While SodaStream removed its factory from the West Bank in 2015, the boycott continued because of its history of discriminating against Palestinian employees. Boycotts against McDonald's and Burger King are related to local Israeli franchises donating meals to the Israeli military. Meanwhile, the boycott of Sabra started much earlier than the others in 2011 since it's half-owned by The Strauss Group, which financially supports the Israeli Defense Forces.

Starbucks is the one company on this list that was boycotted because of a hoax letter that claimed that the company was helping fund the Israeli military. However, the company has denied this connection.

The 2025 boycott of Chobani yogurt was based on a new partnership it made with Planet Harvest. While Planet Harvest has an admirable cause of helping farmers find companies to use their imperfect food to reduce food waste, the main problem is that the company was co-founded by Ivanka Trump. Once learning this, many customers immediately swore to stop buying Chobani.

The Trump family connection was enough for some to boycott the brand. Another thing that didn't sit well with people is that Ivanka said in an interview that she actively decided against buying imperfect food from farmers and giving it to a food bank. Instead, she thought it would do more good to turn a profit.