🏈 Can Trump ACTUALLY block the Commanders Stadium deal in D.C. if they don't change their name back to Redskins?. Maybe, kind of, sort of. A thread that breaks down what you need to know 🧵.

RT @jrholtz: @dilanesper This is a pretty good thread on Trump's possible course of action to stop RFK unless they change the name. TLDR: E….

Can't wait to tell my wife!. Sad news for my mistress, though.

Very cool. Very much able to pay for their own stadium.

major "ladies and gentlemen, the internet!" vibes

RT @JRussellMI: Another year, another Masters ticket lottery rejection in your inbox. Odds below 1%. No transparency. No real path for fans….

Want to stay ahead of the curve on this and other sports/politics crossovers? Subscribe to my newsletter, Free Agent, for deep dives and fun (I hope) commentary:

So yes, Trump can stop the new Commanders Stadium, but he’d have to get Congress to do it. Otherwise he can probably just slow it down. As @JoeRLancaster put it, “if he did scuttle the stadium deal, Trump would be doing the right thing, but in perhaps the most corrupt way.

Not explicitly, no. That would be compelled speech and run afoul of the First Amendment. But in theory they could pass a law blocking the project, then pass another one unblocking it if the Commanders change their name.

Unlike other cities, Congress has unique authority over D.C. issues thanks to the Constitution. Congress could pass a law banning or restricting development on the RFK site. A standalone law is probably unlikely given how they operate, but it could get tucked into some kind of.

The TLDR on Trump taking executive action: He could have federal agencies tie the Commanders Stadium up in a bunch of red tape, but he probably can't stop the project outright thanks to the new 99-year lease. Congress, on the other hand.

The National Capital Planning Commission is likely to have some kind of ADVISORY role that could slow or influence the development, but they can't stop the project outright—because of the brand new 99-year federal lease to the D.C. government. The same is pretty much true of the

There are all kinds of federal agencies a big development like this might interact with, especially agencies overseeing environmental issues. (Remember this site is right on the Anacostia River.). You can easily see the EPA slowing things down, the Interior Department getting.

The federal government still owns the land BUT leased it to the D.C. government under a brand new 99-year lease. Trump can't just cancel that lease with his pen. There are plenty of ways to tie stadium development up in red tape, though.

There are two possible avenues here: Trump takes executive action, or Congress passes a law. Trump signing an executive order is more complicated than just blocking development until a more friendly POTUS reverses it, or courts blocking his order, so we'll start there.

If you liked this thread, I write a newsletter about the intersection of sports, politics, and ideas. It’s called Free Agent—and if you’ve ever cursed the Masters ticket gods, it’s probably for you. Subscribe here🏌️⛳ →

The Masters isn’t just another event—it’s the event for golf fans. Letting real fans pay their way in—or earn their shot—isn’t selling out. It’s respect. Time for Augusta to bring that same precision and intention to its ticket policy.

Would it be perfect? No. But it’s better than a 0.8% shot once a year and no way to build toward a future opportunity. There’s a middle ground between “tradition” and chaos.

Prices—not lotteries—are a better way to allocate scarce tickets. Raise the face value to $500. Or charge a refundable $25 application fee. Even small friction helps separate casual interest from real demand.

The resale ban makes it worse. Even if you pay thousands on StubHub, you could be turned away at the gate. No refunds. No backup plan. That’s a big gamble for one bucket list trip.