“Shockwaves in Sports: Two WNBA Stars Ejected on the Spot for Kneeling During National Anthem Ceremony”

Two WNBA Players Disqualified for Kneeling During National Anthem Under New ‘No Kneeling’ Rule—Debate Over Free Expression Erupts

In a move that has sent shockwaves through the sports world, two WNBA players were recently disqualified midgame after violating the league’s controversial new rule banning kneeling during the national anthem. The policy, officially titled the National Unity Protocol, was introduced just weeks before the start of the 2025 season and strictly prohibits players from kneeling or engaging in any visible protest during the playing of the U.S. national anthem.

The disqualification took place during a high-profile game between the New York Liberty and the Phoenix Mercury. As the anthem played and players lined up in formation, Liberty forward Amara Johnson and Mercury guard Talia Reed dropped to one knee—a silent but powerful gesture long associated with protests against racial injustice and police brutality.

Seconds later, officials conferred at the scorer’s table. The league’s game conduct supervisor, seated courtside, issued an immediate directive: Johnson and Reed were to be removed from the court and disqualified from further participation in the game. The stadium, filled with a mixture of stunned fans and vocal supporters of the players’ actions, fell into a tense silence followed by both cheers and boos.

The Policy and Its Controversy

The WNBA’s “No Anthem Kneeling” policy was ratified by league officials in March 2025 in what Commissioner Elaine Forrester called an effort to “restore focus, unity, and respect for the game and its shared traditions.”

“While we honor every player’s voice and recognize the social issues that matter to them,” Commissioner Forrester said during a press conference announcing the policy, “the national anthem is a sacred moment of collective reflection. We ask our athletes to remain standing in solidarity—not silence—to inspire togetherness, not division.”

Critics of the rule, however, argue that it directly infringes on players’ rights to peacefully protest and use their platforms to bring attention to critical issues facing society.

“This policy is nothing short of censorship,” said civil rights attorney Monica Rivera, who represents several athletes in free speech advocacy. “Athletes are not just entertainers—they are citizens with voices. Silencing those voices during one of the few moments they have public visibility sends the wrong message about whose pain is valid and whose voice matters.”

Fallout and Reaction

Both Johnson and Reed declined to speak to reporters immediately following the game, but have since released a joint statement:

“We knelt not out of disrespect, but out of love for our communities, for the lives lost, and for the promise of America to do better. We accept the consequences but will never apologize for standing—or kneeling—for what we believe in.”

Social media erupted in support of the players, with hashtags like #StandWithAmara, #JusticeThroughSport, and #LetThemKneel trending nationwide. Several athletes from across the WNBA, NBA, NFL, and international leagues voiced solidarity.

Former WNBA MVP Nia Douglass tweeted,

“Silencing protest doesn’t create unity—it erases truth. Proud of Amara and Talia for using their voices.”

Conversely, some league executives and sponsors praised the enforcement of the policy.

A spokesperson for Freedom Holdings, one of the WNBA’s new corporate sponsors, said:

“We support the league’s commitment to preserving respectful traditions. There are appropriate platforms for advocacy, but a professional sporting event should unify, not divide.”

Players’ Union Weighs In

The Women’s National Basketball Players Association (WNBPA) issued a formal grievance to the league within 24 hours of the disqualification. In the statement, union president Kyra Benton said:

“This policy was unilaterally imposed without player input and is in direct conflict with constitutional principles of free speech and the WNBA’s own history of activism and empowerment.”

The WNBPA is reportedly exploring legal avenues to challenge the policy, including potential lawsuits alleging violations of First Amendment protections and unlawful workplace retaliation.

A League Known for Its Activism

The WNBA has long been regarded as one of the most socially active leagues in professional sports. In 2020, players led some of the most visible sports protests in response to the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. Entire teams wore jerseys with the names of victims of police violence and called for criminal justice reform.

This recent policy shift has left many fans and players feeling disoriented, as it seemingly departs from the league’s progressive past.

“Social justice is woven into the DNA of the WNBA,” said sports analyst Daniela Greene. “This policy feels like a complete about-face—and it’s no surprise that players are pushing back.”

What Happens Next?

According to sources within the league, the two players will not face suspension beyond the disqualification, but repeated offenses could result in further disciplinary action, including fines and potential bans. The league has not announced whether the policy will be reviewed in light of the backlash.

WNBA Commissioner Forrester, during a follow-up interview, suggested that she is open to dialogue:

“We are listening. The goal of this policy is not to punish, but to preserve the integrity of the game. We are committed to working with the players to find a common path forward.”

Meanwhile, upcoming games are likely to become even more charged. Several unnamed players have hinted that coordinated demonstrations could take place in upcoming matches as a form of protest against the rule.

Broader Implications

Legal experts, civil rights groups, and athlete advocacy organizations are now closely watching the WNBA’s next moves. Many view this case as a test of the broader debate between organizational policy versus individual expression.

“This is about more than basketball,” said law professor Dr. Elaine Morris. “It’s about what kind of country we want to be—one that uplifts voices seeking justice, or one that silences them for the sake of comfort.”

As for fans, opinions are sharply divided. While some argue that sports should be an escape from politics, others believe there is no wrong place to speak up for justice.

“Sports and society have never been separate,” said lifelong Liberty fan Jenna Rodriguez. “When people kneel, they’re not turning their backs on the flag—they’re demanding that the flag live up to its promises.”

Final Thoughts

The disqualification of Amara Johnson and Talia Reed has opened a new chapter in the WNBA’s ongoing relationship with activism. As tensions mount between league officials and players, the outcome of this conflict could set a precedent—not just for basketball, but for all of professional sports.

Whether the league chooses to uphold the policy or revise it in the face of opposition, one thing is clear: the conversation about justice, protest, and freedom in sports is far from over.