President Trump on the morning of February 8 lashed out at Nordstrom department stores via Twitter for the store’s recent decision to discontinue merchandising Ivanka Trump’s products.
“My daughter Ivanka has been treated so unfairly by @Nordstrom,” read Trump’s tweet. ” She is a great person – always pushing me to do the right thing! Terrible!”
Nordstrom previously stated on February 3 that it would no longer carry Ivanka Trump’s product lines, but that the determination to do so was merely a business decision, according to Politico.
“We’ve said all along we make buying decisions based on performance,” said Nordstrom in a statement to The Associated Press. “We’ve got thousands of brands – more than 2,000 offered on the site alone. Reviewing their merit and making edits is part of the regular rhythm of our business.”
Nordstrom has historically demonstrated concerted efforts to oppose some of the effects of President Trump’s efforts or executive orders. For example, the company circulated an internal statement offering support to families affected by Trump’s executive order banning immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries, according to The New York Times.
Coinciding with Nordstrom’s break away from the Trump family, several other major department stores have also stopped doing business with Trump brands, including T.J. Maxx, Marshalls, and Neiman Marcus.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer maintained that President Trump and his family were not deserving of Nordstrom’s actions, which were directed at Trump’s policies rather than the profitability of Trump products.
“For people to take out their concern about his actions, or his executive orders, on members of his family, he has every right to stand up for his family and applaud their businesses activities, their success,” stated Spicer.
Richard Painter, a former ethics lawyer for the Bush administration, explains that Trump’s public retaliation could invoke suspicion that fowl play is involved in any situation where Nordstrom is negatively affected by federal action.
“Nordstrom will have a due process argument and possibly even a claim when there is any adverse action by the executive branch against it, perhaps a right to discovery as to whether political appointees embarked on a vendetta,” said Painter.
Sources: The New York Times, Politico/Photo Credit: Michael Vadon/Flickr