January 1, NBA Superstar Makes Jaw-Dropping Choice That Has America Asking Questions

Wyatt’s Take

• Golden State Warriors star turned down bigger money from an American company to sign with a Chinese brand previously banned by U.S. authorities
• The deal comes despite serious concerns about the company’s ties to forced labor and human rights abuses
• This massive contract raises hard questions about where American athletes’ loyalties lie when China comes calling with cash

Stephen Curry just signed a deal worth hundreds of millions with Chinese sportswear giant Li-Ning, according to new reports. Here’s the kicker: he had a bigger offer on the table from another company but chose China anyway.

The Golden State Warriors point guard inked the massive contract with Li-Ning despite the fact that the U.S. government banned merchandise from this very same company back in 2022. The ban came over serious concerns about forced labor practices tied to China’s treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.

Think about that for a second. An American sports icon, someone who’s made his fortune in this country, chose to partner with a company our own government said was connected to human rights abuses. And he did it even though he could’ve made more money elsewhere.

The reported deal is worth a staggering amount that puts Curry in an elite tier of athlete endorsements. But the financial details aren’t what’s got folks talking around kitchen tables across America tonight.

It’s the choice itself.

Li-Ning isn’t just any sportswear brand. It’s a Chinese state-connected enterprise that got hit with import restrictions under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized Li-Ning shipments because of concerns the products were made using forced labor from detained Uyghurs.

For context, we’re talking about a region where the Chinese Communist Party has detained over a million people in what they call “re-education camps.” Human rights groups and our own State Department have documented forced sterilizations, torture, and systematic oppression.

Yet Curry looked at all that and said yes to the deal anyway. Even with more money available from a company without those baggage.

The NBA has long had a complicated relationship with China. The league generates enormous revenue from Chinese broadcasting rights and merchandise sales. When a team executive once tweeted support for Hong Kong protesters, China cut ties with that franchise and the NBA practically tripped over itself apologizing.

Players have been noticeably quiet about China’s human rights record, even as many of them speak loudly on domestic political issues. It’s created a credibility problem that a lot of Americans have noticed.

Now Curry’s deal adds fuel to that fire.

Some will defend this as just business. They’ll say athletes have every right to maximize their earning potential and that commerce shouldn’t be politicized. Fair enough.

But when you’re talking about a company specifically banned by your own country over forced labor concerns, it’s hard to separate the dollars from the principle. Especially when you’re taking less money to do it.

This isn’t about telling athletes where they can or can’t sign. It’s about asking whether there’s any amount of money that should make Americans uncomfortable doing business with entities connected to some of the worst human rights abuses happening in the world today.

Curry has built his brand on being a family man, a role model, someone who stands for positive values. Those things matter to the millions of kids who wear his jersey and try to shoot three-pointers like him in driveways across America.

What message does this send to them?

The timing is particularly notable given growing tensions between the U.S. and China on everything from trade to Taiwan to technology. Our government has made it clear that economic dependence on China poses national security risks.

Yet here’s one of America’s most recognizable athletes going all-in with a Chinese company that couldn’t even sell its products here for a while because of forced labor concerns.

It raises uncomfortable questions about influence and where loyalties lie when China waves enough cash around. If a banned company can still land one of the biggest names in sports, what does that say about the effectiveness of our own policies?

And what does it say about the price tag some are willing to put on looking the other way?

Wyatt Matters

When American heroes choose Chinese cash over American values—especially when they’re taking less money to do it—working folks notice. Your kids look up to these athletes. They wear the jerseys, buy the shoes, follow their every move. But at some point, we’ve got to ask ourselves what we’re teaching the next generation when principle gets traded for profit, especially profit tied to the kinds of things that used to make Americans speak up. This isn’t about cancel culture or purity tests. It’s about basic questions of right and wrong that used to be a lot clearer before everything became about the almighty dollar.