In what might be the most unexpected and explosive culture clash of late 2025, pop superstar Sabrina Carpenter has found herself locked in a war of words with the White House. What began as a dispute over a song usage in a government video has spiraled into a personal, insult-laden feud that has captured the attention of both the political and entertainment worlds. The exchange has been nothing short of brutal, with the Trump administration calling the singer “stupid” and Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld weighing in with a scorching critique of celebrity activism.

The Spark: “Juno” Meets ICE

The controversy ignited earlier this week when the Trump White House’s official X (formerly Twitter) account posted a video montage promoting their intensified Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations. The video, designed to showcase the administration’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants, featured dramatic footage of raids, arrests, and deportations.

But it was the soundtrack that caused the uproar. The video was set to Sabrina Carpenter’s hit song “Juno,” specifically looping the cheeky, viral lyric: “Have you ever tried this one? Bye-bye.”

The juxtaposition of a flirty pop lyric with footage of real-world deportations was clearly intended as a taunt, a stylistic choice that has become a trademark of the current administration’s social media strategy. However, for Carpenter, whose brand is built on a fun, “Short n’ Sweet” aesthetic, the association was horrifying.

Sabrina Strikes Back

Carpenter, who is currently riding the wave of her massive “Short n’ Sweet” tour success, wasted no time in condemning the video. In a sharp and emotional post shared with her millions of followers, she denounced the usage of her music.

“This video is evil and disgusting,” Carpenter wrote, her tone stripping away her usual playful persona. “Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda.”

Her statement was a clear line in the sand—a demand to be disassociated from policies she views as cruel. For many artists, such a statement would be the end of it; a public disavowal usually prompts a quiet retreat or a copyright takedown. But this White House plays by different rules.

The “Short n’ Sweet” Clapback

Instead of issuing an apology or removing the video, the White House doubled down with a response that was personally directed at the singer. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson released a statement that didn’t just defend the policy but mocked Carpenter using her own discography against her.

“Here’s a Short n’ Sweet message for Sabrina Carpenter,” the statement began, referencing her album title with dripping sarcasm. “We won’t apologize for deporting dangerous criminal illegal murderers, rapists, and pedophiles from our country.”

Then came the hammer drop, a line referencing lyrics from Carpenter’s song “Manchild”: “Anyone who would defend these sick monsters must be stupid, or is it slow?”

The sheer aggression of the response—labeling a mainstream pop star as “stupid” or “slow” in an official government statement—marked a new low (or high, depending on your perspective) in the antagonistic relationship between Hollywood and Washington.

Gutfeld’s Take: A “Phase of Life” Problem

The feud inevitably became a hot topic on Fox News, where Greg Gutfeld and his panel dissected the situation on Gutfeld!. The segment offered a fascinating glimpse into the conservative critique of celebrity outrage, shifting the argument from policy to psychology.

Gutfeld, known for his acerbic wit, opened the segment with feigned shock: “This is NOT what I expected from someone named Sabrina… or a Carpenter!”

But the humor quickly pivoted to a broader theory about why young celebrities like Carpenter hold the political views they do. For Gutfeld, it’s not about being “evil” or “good”—it’s about age and experience. He argued that Carpenter, and young women of her demographic, simply haven’t lived enough life to understand the necessity of tough policies.

“I’m into the phase of life,” Gutfeld explained. “Look at her… representative of women her age: single, no kids, no responsibilities. They have yet to experience any transformative event that would inform their beliefs.”

He posited that the things Carpenter “detests today,” she will “learn to understand and value later,” drawing a parallel to the regrets people have in their 40s about their 20s—like smoking or skipping school. In Gutfeld’s view, safety and law enforcement are concepts that only become tangible when you have something to lose, like a family or a home. “They don’t know until they know,” he said.

The Hypocrisy Check

The panel didn’t just stick to philosophy; they also went after Carpenter’s image. In a segment that highlighted the perceived hypocrisy of a pop star lecturing the government on morality, the conversation turned to Carpenter’s controversial album cover for Man’s Best Friend.

The cover, which depicts Carpenter on all fours like a dog, with a man presumably holding a leash and gripping her hair, was cited as evidence of a “naughty” public persona that clashes with her high-minded political stance.

“She looks kind of naughty,” Gutfeld quipped, prompting the panel to discuss the “raunchy” nature of her recent work. The implication was clear: Can someone who profits from hyper-sexualized, submissive imagery really claim the moral high ground on “human dignity”?

Panelist Kennedy piled on, referencing Carpenter’s graphic stage antics and joking about her stature. “She is still, at 4’11”, taller than Greg,” she laughed, dismissing the singer’s political weight alongside her physical height.

Compassion or Convenience?

Perhaps the most cutting critique came from panelist Lawrence Jones (implied), who questioned the selective nature of celebrity outrage. He noted that while Carpenter was quick to speak up about her song being used, she—and many of her peers—often remain silent on other national tragedies.

“I go back and I say, ‘Okay, let me go into Instagram… and see their comment when Laken [Riley] was murdered, or Americans were held hostage, or when the border was overrun,’” he said. “And when I don’t find anything, my level of compassion for them… vanishes.”

This sentiment strikes at the heart of the frustration many conservatives feel toward Hollywood: the perception that celebrities only care about “injustice” when it aligns with trendy, progressive talking points, while ignoring issues that affect everyday Americans, such as crime and border security.

The “Dana” Defense

Interestingly, the voice of reason—or at least strategic caution—came from Dana Perino. A former White House Press Secretary herself, Perino warned that engaging in a mudslinging contest with a massive pop star is rarely a winning strategy.

“I don’t think there’s ever any benefit in the fighting on this one with a big celebrity,” Perino cautioned. She noted that Carpenter has a massive, loyal constituency. By attacking her, the administration risks alienating millions of young fans who might otherwise be disengaged politically.

Perino tried to pivot the conversation back to “affordability”—the economic issues that voters actually care about—but admitted that the culture war distraction is potent. “Every time we talk about Sabrina Carpenter… we’re not talking about affordability,” she sighed.

A Sign of the Times

This clash between Sabrina Carpenter and the Trump White House is more than just a tabloid spat; it’s a microcosm of the divided cultural landscape in 2025. On one side, you have the creative class, utilizing their art and platforms to advocate for humanitarian ideals. On the other, a combative administration that views these artists as out-of-touch elites and isn’t afraid to use their own work to troll them.

For now, the battle lines are drawn. Carpenter has her fans and her moral outrage; the White House has its policy and its “Short n’ Sweet” insults. As for who wins? As Gutfeld suggests, perhaps we just have to wait until everyone hits 40 to find out.

But one thing is certain: The next time you hear “Juno” on the radio, you might think less about a summer fling and more about national security. And that is exactly how the culture war works.