Amber Rose Slams Ariana Grande on ICE Protests, Arguing Actions Have Costs

Amber Rose asserted that celebrity activism has real costs, urging caution and awareness of the economic impact on everyday people.

A Daily Express US article shared that Amber Rose has publicly criticised singer Ariana Grande after Grande urged Americans to join a nationwide protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by staying home from work, school or shopping.

Rose argued that Grande's call to action overlooks the economic realities facing many ordinary people and could have unintended human consequences.

In a dramatic exchange during a livestream, Rose challenged Grande's stance and highlighted how wealthy celebrities risk sounding out of touch when they advocate for actions that might harm those living paycheck to paycheck.

Grande's Nationwide ICE Protest Call

As discussed in the same Daily Express US article, Grande shared an Instagram Story earlier this month promoting a "nationwide shutdown" protest scheduled for 30 January, encouraging followers to skip work, not attend school and halt shopping in protest of ICE operations.

Her post, which read, 'ICE out! Nationwide shutdown! No work. No school. No shopping. Jan 30, 2026,' quickly spread online and sparked debate about the impact of such actions on everyday Americans.

This protest stems from heightened tensions around federal immigration enforcement and recent fatal encounters involving federal officers, drawing public attention to ICE's practices and the broader impact on communities.

Rose's Candid Rebuke

During the livestream, Rose responded sharply to Grande's message, arguing that urging people to stop working and participating in economic activity could have serious implications for families.

She said that Grande, whom she estimated to be worth hundreds of millions, should reconsider advocating a protest that asks ordinary people to risk their livelihoods: 'Ariana Grande ... I think she's worth, I don't know, $250–300 million dollars, telling people to not go to work, protest ICE. It's like, "Girl, shut the f--- up,"' Rose told her audience.

Rose went further, questioning whether wealthy figures should encourage others to forego work, education or family support: '... anyone that tells people to not go to work, not go to school, not f---ing buy things for their family, and they're worth $250–300 million dollars, they should shut the f--- up.'

A Broader Debate on Celebrity Activism

Rose's remarks also touched on a wider conversation about celebrity involvement in political causes and the responsibility that comes with influence.

During the same discussion, she defended rapper Nicki Minaj amid controversy over her political associations, pointing to Minaj's charitable contributions as a measure of her intent. 'She pledged a lot of money to help young girls ... I'll never fully understand why she's getting flack, because she's helping people,' Rose said.

Rose also drew a distinction between advocating for protest and actions that could escalate tension with federal law enforcement. She cautioned against crossing dangerous lines, noting that hostility toward federal agents during protests could have serious consequences.

Human Consequences at the Heart

An AOL report revealed that the critics of the protest call have echoed concerns about its potential impact on workers, students and families.

Experts and commentators highlighted that for many Americans, missing a day of work or school can have tangible negative effects, especially for those who depend on daily wages or lack paid leave.

Meanwhile, supporters of the protest argue that collective action is necessary to draw attention to perceived injustices tied to ICE and federal enforcement practices.

They maintain that solidarity and disruption can be powerful tools for change, even if they require short-term sacrifices.

Public Reaction and Ongoing Coverage

Following Rose's comments, social media debates intensified, with users weighing in on the responsibilities of celebrities in political discourse.

Some praised Rose's perspective as grounded and practical, while others defended Grande's right to use her platform to raise awareness and mobilise support.

As the conversation continues, it underscores the complex balance between advocacy, privilege and real-world effects — a debate that resonates far beyond celebrity feuds.

Rose's critique highlights that when high-profile figures weigh in on contentious public issues, the human consequences of their rhetoric — particularly for everyday people — can be just as newsworthy as the issues themselves.