SZA criticizes Trump’s White House for using her music in a new ICE video without permission, accusing officials of targeting and “rage-baiting” artists.

SZA Calls Out Unauthorized Song Use

December 11, 2025: SZA is forcefully speaking out after discovering that her music was used without permission in a newly released ICE video promoted by Donald Trump’s White House. The singer slammed the administration for what she described as “rage-baiting artists,” accusing officials of intentionally provoking musicians who do not support their political agenda.

Her statement quickly spread across social media, igniting a fresh wave of debate over music rights and political messaging.

“Stop Using My Art for Your Agenda”

SZA condemned the use of her track, emphasizing that she never approved any political use of her work—especially by an administration whose policies she has publicly opposed. She argued that the move was not an accident but a strategic attempt to weaponize her popularity for political optics.

Her frustration echoed long-standing complaints from artists across genres who have repeatedly objected to political figures using their songs without consent.

HOLR has the latest news on how musicians continue to push back against unauthorized political use of their work.

A Pattern of Conflict With Artists

Trump-aligned campaigns and government bodies have faced similar backlash in the past from musicians such as Rihanna, Pharrell Williams, Bruce Springsteen, and Adele. SZA’s criticism adds to a growing list of artists publicly denouncing political misuse of copyrighted material.

The controversy highlights how musicians are increasingly vocal about their rights—and unwilling to let their art be co-opted.

ICE Video Sparks Broader Outrage

The ICE promotional clip, which focuses on immigration enforcement, struck an especially sensitive chord. Critics argue that pairing SZA’s music with a message she does not support creates a false impression of endorsement.

Fans and fellow artists quickly backed her, pointing out the ethical and legal implications of the government using copyrighted work without permission.

SZA Accuses Administration of “Rage-Baiting”

She didn’t stop at copyright concerns. SZA accused the Trump White House of deliberately baiting artists into public conflict as a political strategy. She suggested that provoking backlash from high-profile celebrities helps the administration generate headlines and fuel culture-war narratives.

Her comments framed the incident not as a mistake, but as a calculated tactic.

Artists Fight for Control of Their Work

The controversy underscores a larger battle over intellectual property, especially as political content spreads rapidly online. Many artists argue that unauthorized use distorts their brand, alienates fans, and violates moral rights tied to their work.

HOLR notes that musicians are increasingly turning to legal action and public pressure to protect their creative identity.

Public Response Remains Divided

Supporters praised SZA for standing up against what they see as exploitation of her music, while critics dismissed her reaction as political posturing. Still, the wider cultural conversation continues to shift toward respecting artists’ boundaries—especially when their work intersects with polarizing topics.

What Happens Next

It remains unclear whether SZA plans legal action or whether the administration will remove the video. For now, her message is unmistakable: her art cannot be used to endorse political narratives she fundamentally rejects.

A Stand for Artistic Autonomy

SZA’s public response reinforces a crucial point—musicians deserve control over how their work is used. Her refusal to remain silent adds momentum to a growing movement of artists defending their creative rights against political misuse.