Enlarge By Ron Edmonds, AP A Washington Redskins helmet showing the team logo in a 2003 photo. IN 'THE HUDDLE' COMMUNITY IN 'THE HUDDLE' COMMUNITY Get the latest buzz from around the NFL in 'The Huddle,' USA TODAY's football blog READ THE LATEST POSTS READ THE LATEST POSTS Read all posts WASHINGTON  The Supreme Court on Monday spurned without comment an appeal by Native Americans challenging the Washington Redskins ' team name as perpetuating offensive stereotypes. "For almost 40 years the Native American community has sought to retire Pro-Football's 'Redskins' trademark," the National Congress of American Indians, backing the individual challengers, had told the court. "The mark is patently offensive, disparaging, and demeaning and perpetrates a centuries-old stereotype." Pro-Football is the corporate name of the group that owns and operates the Redskins. The American Indian group, supporting Suzan Harjo and other challengers to the Redskins' name, said that since 1968 when the group began urging schools to drop names tied to Native Americans, "hundreds of high schools and colleges have discontinued their use of Indian names and mascots." The NCAI characterized the pro team as a disrespectful holdout, adding, "To many Native Americans, the term 'Redskins' is associated with the barbaric practice of scalping." Without any recorded vote, the justices let stand a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that had said the American Indians had not asserted their rights under trademark law in a timely fashion. The Redskins trademark was first issued in 1967, and the lawsuit filed in 1992. In urging the justices to reject the appeal, lawyers for Pro-Football said the appeal would have tested the team's exclusive right to use the trademark, not whether it had to abandon the nickname altogether. The lawyers also said the Redskins have invested millions of dollars in promoting and advertising the trademark. The Native Americans said that they had for decades reached out to team owners, urging them to voluntarily change the name, before resorting to the lawsuit. *** (The case is Hardo v. Pro-Football.) Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more