Are the next targets the Cleveland Indians or Chicago Blackhawks? (The Blackhawks' logo also features the head of an apparent Native American, and includes four feathers.)
The real objection that deserves to be made is against the concept that select groups, claiming to speak for victimized classes, have a de facto right of approval or disapproval on the operations of a business. Are we entering an era where concentrated public opinion against certain businesses can be used to extort financial settlements or changes in business operations, including ones where the enterprise is made to suffer a financial penalty such as with the Redskins' potential signficant loss in brand value? Are self-proving cries of racism or other offense an acceptable motive to engage in the equivalent of the now-rightfully-banned practice that used to be called "redlining"? And at what point do these rulings and private efforts start to echo the same egregious civil rights violations that were finally found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1950s and 1960s?