What each side wants in the Homeland Security shutdown standoff

WASHINGTON – TheDepartment of Homeland Securityhas been shut down for more than two weeks,jeopardizing airport security, disaster relief, coastline safety and even pay for members of the Secret Service as they guarded the president during theState of the Union.

The Trump administration sent its latest proposal to Senate Democrats to reopen the agency on Feb. 27, but the negotiations between the White House and Capitol Hill have been happening largely behind closed doors.

There's still no end in sightto the funding impasse. Members of both parties have continued talking past each other, at least publicly, in recent days. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters Feb. 25 the Trump administration had yet to start negotiating earnestly about demands to reform federal immigration enforcement.

Another person has been fatally shot by federal law enforcement in Minneapolis, officials said on Jan. 24. The shooting comes just over two weeks after 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good was shot in the head by a federal immigration officer in a residential neighborhood south of downtown. See the scene of a shooting.

" style="max-width:100%; height:auto; border-radius:6px; margin:10px 0;" loading="lazy" />

Man fatally shot by federal officers in Minneapolis. Photos show the scene

Another personhas been fatally shot by federal law enforcementin Minneapolis, officials said on Jan. 24. The shooting comes just over two weeksafter 37-year-old Renee Nicole Goodwas shot in the head by a federal immigration officer in a residential neighborhood south of downtown. See the scene of a shooting.

Hours later, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-South Dakota, contradicted Murray, pointing to the fact that top administration officials and Senate Democrats were trading paper.

"The White House, I think, has been, in good faith, trying to come to the table and work out some of the differences that the Democrats have," he said, "but in ways that don't jeopardize or undermine the ability of our law enforcement officials to do their jobs, and do them in a way that keeps them safe."

It was an indication of how far apart both sides still remain in the shutdown standoff – the third occasion in PresidentDonald Trump's second term during which funding for the 9/11-era Cabinet agency has lapsed.

Lawmakers and administration officials have indicated thousands of employees are working without pay while some critical functions, including at the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Coast Guard, have been scaled back until the shutdown ends. (Immigration enforcement operations have continued as usual.)

Despite those high stakes, the president made sparing mentions of the funding lapse duringhis State of the Union speechon Feb. 24. The lack of attention he brought to the issue underlined just how commonplace shutdowns have become in Washington, especially in the second Trump era.

The longer the situation drags on, the worse it will become. Union leaders for workers at the Transportation Security Administration are already anticipating longer wait times for airline passengers after TSA employees received a fraction of their usual pay on Friday, Feb. 27.

But it doesn't feel like lawmakers are experiencing a critical mass of pressure from their constituents yet to force a deal. And the further away the timeline gets from the fatal shootings of two Minnesotans in January, the more leverage Republicans may sense they have. Washington's attention has already started largely turning away from the politics of immigration enforcement and toward heightened tensions with Iran and Cuba.

Advertisement

Read more:Why travelers should prep for a DHS shutdown with no end in sight

What Democrats want

Weeks ago, Democrats made 10 central demands to the White House.

Afterthe killing of Alex Pretti, Democrats took a stand to push for a ban on mask-wearing for agents, stricter use-of-force standards and body camera requirements. They also want tightened restrictions around what types of warrants authorize federal officials to arrest people and use force to enter residences. And they want to reestablish a longstanding precedent that Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, won't target so-called "sensitive locations" such as schools, hospitals and churches.

"All they have to do is agree with our simple ideas that every police department, just about, in America, follows," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, on Feb. 25. "It's plain and simple."

An incident in Schumer's own state a day after he made those remarks may throw a wrench in the negotiations with the White House. According to administrators at Columbia University in New York City, five federal agents misrepresented who they were – falsely saying they were police looking for a missing child – in order to gain access to a residential dorm. Without a warrant, they thendetained a senior named Ellie Aghayevaover concerns about her student visa. She was released later that day after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani made a personal appeal to the president.

What Republicans want

Republicans in Congress and the White House are still pushing back on various pieces of Democrats' proposals.

House Speaker Mike Johnsonhas said that appeals for a mask ban and judicial warrant requirements are nonstarters. Face coverings are arguably the biggest sticking point, as Johnson and other GOP lawmakers have said they help prevent federal agents from becoming targets for harassment or threats.

The speaker has, however, indicated an openness to limits on so-called "roving patrols," or random stops of suspicious vehicles, and to bolstering body-worn camera usage. Before the fatal shooting of Pretti by Border Patrol agents upended the bipartisan agreement to fund DHS through the rest of the year, Republicans had already agreed to set aside $20 million for body-worn cameras for immigration enforcement agents.

Schumer's office said Feb. 27 it was closely reviewing the White House's latest counteroffer.

Zachary Schermele is a congressional reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Where things stand in the Homeland Security shutdown standoff

byCustos Caelorum

in

March 01, 2026

What each side wants in the Homeland Security shutdown standoff

WASHINGTON – TheDepartment of Homeland Securityhas been shut down for more than two weeks,jeopardizing airport security,...

Read More

Can you have a gun if you smoke a lot of pot? Supreme Court to decide

WASHINGTON − The Trump administration, which has ardently backed gun rights, will nonetheless try to convince theSupreme Courton March 2 that frequent pot smokerscan be imprisonedfor having a gun.

The Justice Department will make that argument even as the administration ismoving to reclassifymarijuana to a less dangerous category of drugs – and as cannabis is legal in some form in the majority of states.

That's just one of the noteworthy aspects of thecase, the second involving the constitutional right to bear arms that the justices are deciding this year.

Their rulings could clarify the legal test for gun regulations the court created in recent years that has led to a spike in challenges to gun rules. It's also caused much confusion in lower courts as they try to apply the test.

But the justices could sidestep the Second Amendment aspect and decide that the federal law prohibiting an "unlawful user" of a controlled substance from having a firearm is problematic for other reasons. That might limit the reach of the ban to anyone "addicted" to marijuana or any other drug considered dangerous enough to be regulated by the government, rather than also covering the estimated tens of millions of Americans who recreationally use pot and other drugs.

Here's what you need to know.

What is the case about?

The government is defending its prosecution of Ali Danial Hemani, a dual citizen of the United States and Pakistan whom the FBI had been monitoring because of his alleged connection to Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard. The government has designated the guard a global terrorist group.

During a 2022 search of his Texas home, Hemani told the agents he had a Glock 9mm pistol and also said he used marijuana "about every other day."

Although the government tried to detain Hemani on more serious allegations of criminal activity, he was charged only with having a gun while being an unlawful user of marijuana. That's a felony, punishable by up to 15 years in prison.

How did the lower court rule?

The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the gun ban can't be applied to Hemani under theSupreme Court's landmark 2022 ruling that gunprohibitions must be grounded in history that is"consistent with our tradition of gun regulation."

While history and tradition support "some limits on apresentlyintoxicated person's right to carry a weapon," the appeals courtsaid, "they do not support disarming a sober person based solely on past substance usage."

Why is the Trump administration defending the law?

In theother gun rights casethe Supreme Court is considering this term, the Justice Department opposes Hawaii's restrictive rules for guns in public places.

"As I said soon after taking office, the Second Amendment is not a second-class right," Attorney GeneralPam Bondiwrote on Xafter filing a Supreme Court brief challenging Hawaii's law. "My Justice Department will continue to be the most pro-Second Amendment Justice Department in history."

More:Supreme Court skeptical of Hawaii gun law, nicknamed 'Vampire Rule'

But Hemani's case, the government argues, "presents narrow circumstances" where the government can meet the "rigorous burden" imposed when limiting gun rights.

"A person regains his ability to possess arms as soon as he stops habitually using drugs," lawyers for the Justice Department wrote in a filing.

The Brady gun control advocacy group was on the opposite side of the Hawaii case but backs the Justice Department's defense of the federal ban on drug users having guns.

"We have major disagreements with the Trump administration on gun violence prevention," said Douglas Letter, the group's chief legal officer. "That doesn't mean they're always wrong."

Is Trump trying to declassify marijuana?

PresidentDonald Trumphasdirected the Justice Departmentto work on reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous substance.

"The policy of the United States, it appears, is that cannabis may be useful medicine for some patriotic Americans − while also being the spark that twists ordinary people into maniacs who are primed to attack the police," the libertarian Cato Institute and the Rason Foundation wrote in afilingsupporting Hemani.

The Justice Departmenttoldthe Supreme Court that the purpose of the reclassification is to "facilitate medical marijuana and CBD research" while also continuing to restrict the sale of products that pose serious health risks.

Advertisement

Still, Heather Trela at the Rockefeller Institute of Government, a public policy think tank, said the pending rescheduling "does potentially weaken the federal government's argument of the inherent dangers of cannabis use."

If there are medical uses for a controlled substance, the justices might question whether there's a difference between prohibiting gun ownership for those who smoke pot recreationally versus those who use it medicinally, Trelawrote in a previewof the oral arguments.

How often is the law used?

The goverment says it regularly charges more than 300 people each year with having a gun while being either an unlawful user of a controlled substance or a drug addict. The Justice Department said that provision "plays an integral role" in a set of rules designed to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous or irresponsible people. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed in response to the assassinations of President Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr.

But the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers says the provision of the act at issue is being used less for public safety reasons and primarily as a tool for selective prosecutions, leverage in plea bargains or "as a means of incarcerating otherwise law-abiding citizens when the government's primary theory falls short."

Hemani's case, the association said in a afiling, makes their point. The government couldn't make its preferred charges stick, so the law at issue provided an easy fallback "because both drug use and firearm ownership are ubiquitous features of American life."

How might the case affect gun rules generally?

In its landmark 2022 decisionstriking down New York's lawrequiring residents to have a good reason to obtain a license to carry a handgun, the Supreme Court created a new "historical tradition" test for firearm rules.

That forced a reassessment of perhaps thousands of Second Amendment rights cases around the country, said Eric Ruben, a law professor at Southern Methodist University.

In a 2024 decision upholding a lawbanning domestic abusers from owning guns, the court tried to clarify how close a modern law has to be with a historical one for it to be constitutional.

But the lower courts are still "all over the place in terms of what you're supposed to be analogizing to," Ruben said.

Adam Winkler, a UCLA School of Law professor, said the confusion has opened the door for judges to impose their own preferences. Judges appointed by Democrat presidents are upholding gun laws even when there's weak historical evidence while Republican-appointed judges are striking down laws for lack of a historical "twin" – even though the Supreme Court has said that's not the standard, Winkler said.

"What we've seen is a lot of judicial activism in this space," he said. "The Supreme Court has not provided much helpful guidance."

Could the court avoid ruling on the Second Amendment?

It's possible, however, that the justices could decide Hemani's case without clarifying their constitutionality test for gun rules.

"This case has been billed as the Court's next big Second Amendment battle," Joel Johnson, a former Justice Department attorney who teaches at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, wrote in afilingsupporting Hemani. "But it need not be."

Both Johnson and Hemani's lawyers argue that the "unlawful user" provision of the statute should fall because it's impermissibly vague. The law doesn't say, for example, how much pot you have to smoke, how often and how recently to be barred from having a gun.

"It's simply impossible for an ordinary person to understand what is prohibited," said Brandon Buskey, director of the ACLU's Criminal Law Reform Project. The ACLU is one of the legal groups representing Hemani.

"I think the government position is really confusing the idea of drug use with drug abuse," Buskey said.

The Justice Department says someone has to be an "habitual" user to be banned from having a gun. But that's different from what the government has said in the past and is still undefined, Hemani's lawyers argue.

While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives long interpreted the law to be triggered by a single drug-possession conviction or failed drug test within the past year, it now wants the test to be a "pattern of ongoing use."

That issue makes it hard to predict how consequential the case could be for further refining when gun regulations can pass constitutional muster, said Winkler, author of "Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America."

"I don't know if the court will find the vagueness off-ramp attractive," Winkler said. "It's possible that the court could rule on vagueness and thus not have any impact on the Second Amendment doctrine whatsoever."

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Can you have a gun if you smoke a lot of pot? Supreme Court to decide

byCustos Caelorum

in

March 01, 2026

Can you have a gun if you smoke a lot of pot? Supreme Court to decide

WASHINGTON − The Trump administration, which has ardently backed gun rights, will nonetheless try to convince theSupreme...

Read More

'Heated Rivalry' star Hudson Williams joins Connor Storrie on 'SNL'

Things are getting "heated" on "Saturday Night Live."

"Heated Rivalry" star Connor Storriemade his "SNL" hosting debut onthe sketch show's Feb. 28 episode, and he wasn't alone: His costar on the wildly popular hockey romance series,Hudson Williams, was also in the building.

Williams appeared early in the episode in a sketch where a couple argues after a surprise proposal in front of the Rockefeller Center ice skating rink, only for the man to become distracted by a group of guys gleefully skating around behind them. Williams skated into the sketch and hugged Storrie, drawing cheers from the "SNL" studio audience. "Sorry I'm late, fellas, but I have a serious question: Who's ready to skate their butts off?" Williams asked.

'SNL' cold open:James Austin Johnson's President Donald Trump defends Iran attacks

Later, Williams helped Storrie introduce musical guest Mumford & Sons, and he joined Storrie on stage as the host said goodnight at the end of the episode.

Williams and Storrie star on "Heated Rivalry" as two hockey players who become entangled in a secret, steamy relationship, despite being rivals in the sport. The show has become a sensation since debuting on HBO Max last year, skyrocketing both Williams and Storrie to fame.

In his monologue, Storrie joked that, "Some of you may have seen literally all of me" on "Heated Rivalry," which is filled with graphic sex scenes.

Advertisement

"It's a show that has taught a lot of people about hockey, and it's taught a lot of straight women that their sexuality is actually gay guy," he said.

See 'Heated Rivalry' stars:Hudson Williams and Connor Storrie in photos

On a more serious note, Storrie noted he has "only technically been a professional actor for like six months now" and was working as a waiter before landing "Heated Rivalry." He said he has been "preparing for this for my entire life since I was a 12 year-old obsessed with acting."

'Heated Rivalry' stars in the spotlight:Meet Connor Storrie and Hudson Wiliams

"I really did not know if this would ever to happen to me, and when I got the call that I was going to be on 'SNL,' I honestly cried," he also said.

The Feb. 28 episode marked the "SNL" hosting debut for Storrie. The actor's busy weekend will continue on March 1, when he's scheduled to be a presenter at the Actor Awards in Los Angeles.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Connor Storrie 'SNL' features Hudson Williams 'Heated Rivalry' cameo

byCustos Caelorum

in

February 28, 2026

'Heated Rivalry' star Hudson Williams joins Connor Storrie on 'SNL'

Things are getting "heated" on "Saturday Night Live." "Heated Rivalry" star Con...

Read More

How the World Is Reacting to the Attack on Iran

A young Iranian protester shouts anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli slogans during an anti-war protest against the U.S. and Israeli military attacks, in Tehran, on Feb. 28, 2026. Credit - Morteza Nikoubazl—NurPhoto via Getty Images

World leaders reacted with a mix of support, condemnation and urgent calls for restraint after the United States and Israel launched a sweeping military campaign against Iran on Saturday thatkilledSupreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

President Donald Trump announced Khamenei's death in a post on Truth Social, calling it "the single greatest chance for the Iranian people to take back their country."

The U.S. and Israel announced their strikes on the Middle Eastern nation in the early hours of Saturday morning after weeks of Trump threatening Iran over their nuclear deal program. The strikes hit the capital Tehran, as well as Qom, Karaj, Kermanshah, Tabriz and Isfahan, where there is a major nuclear facility.

Read More:Does Trump Have the Legal Authority to Strike Iran? An Expert Explains

In the hours after the initial U.S. and Israeli strikes, Russia and China released statements in support of Iran, while Canada, Australia and Ukraine were among those who expressed support for the U.S. and Israel. Several world leaders urged restraint and de-escalation on both sides moving forward.

Here is a round up of what world leaders have said about the operation that has begun war in the Middle East.

United Kingdom

Prime Minister Keir Starmer chaired a meeting of the government's emergency Cobra committee as the country weighs its response to the attacks and Tehran's retaliation across the Gulf.

It did not participate in the military action, but the country had deployed RAF Typhoons to Qatar to protect the al-Udeid airbase and allied bases across the region.

The UK government on Saturday said in a statement it "does not want to see further escalation into a wider regional conflict." Still, a government spokesperson emphasized that "Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and that is why we have continually supported efforts to reach a negotiated solution."

Starmer released a joint statement with French President Emmanuel Macron and  German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, telling Iran to stop their retaliatory attacks on countries in the Middle East.

"We condemn Iranian attacks on countries in the region in the strongest terms," the joint statement reads. "We call for a resumption of negotiations and urge the Iranian leadership to seek a negotiated solution. Ultimately, the Iranian people must be allowed to determine their future."

Russia

Russia condemned the U.S. and Israel's attack, calling it  "a pre-planned and unprovoked act of armed aggression against a sovereign and independent U.N. member state," in a statement from Russia's Foreign Affairs Ministryposted to Telegram.

It accused the U.S. and Israel of  "plunging the Middle East into an abyss of uncontrolled escalation" and said the attacks could cause a "humanitarian, economic and possibly radiological catastrophe" in the Middle East.

China

China's Foreign Ministry spokespersonsaid on Xthat "Iran's sovereignty, security and territorial integrity should be respected."

"China calls for an immediate stop of the military actions, no further escalation of the tense situation, resumption of dialogue and negotiation, and efforts to uphold peace and stability in the Middle East," the statement continued.

France

In addition to the joint statement with the leaders of the United Kingdom and Germany, French President Emmanuel Macronsaid on X, in a post originally in French, that the escalation "is dangerous for all."

"It must stop," he added. "The Iranian regime must understand that it now has no other option but to engage in good faith in negotiations to end its nuclear and ballistic programs, as well as its regional destabilization activities. This is absolutely necessary for the security of all in the Middle East."

He called for an "urgent" meeting of the United Nations Security Council.

European Union

Ursula von der Leyen, the European Union's chief executive, saidin a statement on social mediathat the EU has "consistently promoted diplomatic efforts aimed at addressing the nuclear and ballistic programmes through a negotiated solution.""We call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint, to protect civilians, and to fully respect international law," she said.

Canada

Prime Minister Mark Carney saidin a statement on Xthat Canada supports the U.S. "acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security."

"Canada's position remains clear: The Islamic Republic of Iran is the principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East, has one of the world's worst human rights records and must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons."

Australia

Australia's Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, said in a statement on X that the country backs the U.S. in their military operation.

"We support the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent Iran continuing to threaten international peace and security," he said.

The country also updated their travel recommendations to "Do Not Travel" for Lebanon and Israel.

Pakistan

Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs released astatementSaturday condemning what it calls "unwarranted attacks against the Islamic Republic of Iran," as well as retaliatory attacks by "Iran against the brotherly countries of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE."

Advertisement

The Ministry confirmed that a Pakistani national was killed in the UAE during the attacks.

"We urge all sides to refrain from any further actions that may undermine the security and territorial integrity of other regional countries," the statement read.

India

India's Ministry of Foreign affairssaid in a statementthat the country is "deeply concerned at the recent developments in Iran and the Gulf region."

"We urge all sides to exercise restraint, avoid escalation, and prioritise the safety of civilians," it continues. "Dialogue and diplomacy should be pursued to de-escalate tensions and address underlying issues. Sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states must be respected."

Spain

Spain Prime Minister Pedro Sánchezcalled on Xfor " immediate de-escalation and full respect for international law," decrying the potential for another "prolonged" war in the Middle East.

"We reject the unilateral military action by the United States and Israel, which represents an escalation and contributes to a more uncertain and hostile international order," he said. "We likewise reject the actions of the Iranian regime and the Revolutionary Guard."

Saudi Arabia

The Saudi Foreign Affairs Ministry condemned Iran's retaliatory strikes across the region in a statement.

"The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia condemns and denounces in strongest terms the blatant Iranian aggression and the flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the U.A.E., Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, and Jordan,"  the statement reads.

United Arab Emirates

After the UAE was hit by retaliatory strikes from Iran, its Ministry of Foreign Affairscondemnedits neighbor in a statement, calling the strikes a  "flagrant violation of national sovereignty and a clear breach of international law and the Charter of the United Nations."

"The UAE underscored that it retains its full and legitimate right to respond to these attacks in a manner that safeguards its sovereignty, national security, and territorial integrity, and ensures the safety of its citizens and residents, in accordance with international law," the statement continued.

Oman

Oman's Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidisaid on XSaturday after the attacks that he was "dismayed."

"Active and serious negotiations have yet again been undermined," said Al Busaidi, who has been a key mediator in recent U.S.-Iran nuclear talks. "Neither the interests of the United States nor the cause of global peace are well served by this. And I pray for the innocents who will suffer."

United Nations

Volker Türk, the UN's Human Rights Commissioner, criticized both the strikes against Iran, and Iran's retaliatory strikes."As always, in any armed conflict, it is civilians who end up paying the ultimate price," he said in a statement on Saturday. "I call for restraint and implore all parties to see reason, to de-escalate, and for a return to the 'negotiating table' where they had been actively seeking a solution only hours earlier."

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres also condemned military action on all sides of the conflict.

"I call for an immediate cessation of hostilities & de-escalation. Failing to do so risks a wider regional conflict with grave consequences for civilians & regional stability," Guterressaid on X

He also pointed out in the post that the UN's Charter prohibits "the threat of the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

Ukraine

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky condemned Iran for being "Putin's accomplice" in a poston X reactingto the escalation.

"It is important that the United States is acting decisively. Whenever there is American resolve, global criminals weaken. This understanding must also come to the Russians."

Albania

Albania Prime Minister Edi Ramasaid on Xthat Albania stands "firm with Israel and with the peace-seeking brotherly Arab countries" and that it supports the United States' military contribution.

"We fully endorse every decisive effort to prevent once and for all the murderers in Tehran from acquiring nuclear or any other military capacity to harm Israel or any other peace-loving nation in the Middle East," Rama said. "Terrorism must be named. And once named, it must be stopped."

Hungary

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a Trump ally in Europe, immediately expressed concerns for how the strikes would impact oil prices. The strikes, he toldreporters, "doubled the importance of the Friendship oil pipeline," which runs through Ukraine. Shipments of Russian oil have been disrupted since January, and Orbán has accused Ukraine ofimposingan "oil blockade."

Kuwait

Kuwait's Ali Al Salem Air Base, which is used by the U.S. military, was also targeted as part of Iran's military retaliation. Kuwait released a statement condemning the Iranian attacks on their soil and asserted their right to respond to the "brazen attack" via Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Qatar

In similar statements to Kuwait and UAE, Qatar condemned Iran's retaliatory attacks and reaffirmed their own right to respond, as per international law.

"The State of Qatar expresses its strong condemnation of the targeting of Qatari territory with Iranian ballistic missiles, considering it a flagrant violation of its national sovereignty, a direct infringement on its security and territorial integrity, and an unacceptable escalation that threatens the security and stability of the region," the statement,posted to X, read.

Lebanon

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salamsaid on Xthat he "will not accept anyone dragging the country into adventures that threaten its security and unity."

Contact usatletters@time.com.

byCustos Caelorum

in

February 28, 2026

How the World Is Reacting to the Attack on Iran

A young Iranian protester shouts anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli slogans during an anti-war protest against the U.S. and Isra...

Read More

Manon’s Katseye Hiatus Highlights an Isolating Journey for Black Women in Pop

"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links."

Black women pursuing acclaim in pop music have been grossly misunderstood throughout history. Most are overlooked or pigeonholed into R&B and soul genres. Others often take hard tumbles along the way to stardom while still not being fully appreciated for their contributions. Few break through.

Frankly, Black female pop stars pour themselves into an industry that doesn't always love them back.

It's hard not to think of this when considering Manon Bannerman's recent departure from the girl groupKatseye. Last week, the band's labelsHYBE and Geffen announced the newson Weverse (the HYBE-backed fan engagement platform), revealing that Bannerman was taking a temporary hiatus to "focus on her health and wellbeing." Shortly after, Bannerman, Katseye's sole Black member,released her own statement, which poked holes in the one shared by her labels.

"Hi, friends," the 23-year-old wrote via Weverse DMs. "I want you to hear this from me: I'm healthy, I'm okay, and I'm taking care of myself. Thank [you] for checking in! Sometimes things unfold in ways we don't fully control, but I'm trusting the bigger picture. Thank you for standing by me. I love you endlessly and can't wait to see you again."

Both statements sent shockwaves throughout the industry and the internet, leaving many to reflect on the loneliness Black women in pop girl groups face. But Bannerman's departure isn't only indicative of a plight in mainstream groups; instead, it's yet another consequence of the music industry's failure to fully see and support Black women in pop.

Katseye is the product of an experiment. Formed in 2023, the six-piece act (including Bannerman, Daniela Avanzini, Lara Raj, Megan Skiendiel, Sophia Laforteza, and Yoonchae Jeung) was created by HYBE's K-pop-inspired competition seriesThe Debut: Dream Academy. Bannerman, who's Swiss-Italian and Ghanaian, was the last to join the group. Already having a following on social media for fashion content, she was scouted directly—becoming the only Katseye member not discovered onDream Academy. In 2024, the group dropped their first EPSIS (Soft Is Strong). That same year, their rise was chronicled in the Netflix docuseriesPop Star Academy: Katseye.

Since then, Katseye has swiftly become the It girl group. They've dropped a handful of Billboard-charting singles (including the viral hit "Gnarly"), secured a major brand deal with Pandora and appeared in a Fendi campaign, embarked on a world tour, announced their Coachella debut, and garnered twoGrammy nominations, including best new artist—all without a full-length album under their belt. The pressure was on for all the girls. But it's likely Bannerman felt a unique weight in all of this, given she's the group's only Black member. InPop Star Academy, Bannerman's missing rehearsals became a focal point, leaving some to speculate about her work ethic.

"Being called lazy, especially as a Black girl, is not fair," shetoldThe Cutearlier this month about the critiques. "Now I feel like I always need to put in extra work to prove something, even though I really don't."

Advertisement

As of this writing, Bannerman hasn't officially addressed the speculation that racism led to her exit. But sheliked a postthat stated, "Another Black girl subjected to racism and label mistreatment yet again." Following the news, Bannerman has received an outpouring of support from fellow musicians. During a performance at Blue Note NYC on Friday,Lizzo performed "Gnarly"and gave Bannerman a sweet shout-out: "We love you and support you, girl. Take your time." Leigh-Anne Pinnock, a Little Mix alum who wants tocollaborate with Normani and Bannerman,wrote on X, "We need to protect each other." Melody Thornton, the Pussycat Dolls' lone Black singer,posted a picture of Bannermanon her Instagram account with the caption, "We see you." On Discord,Chlöe Bailey wrote, "I'm so sad about Manon."

The overwhelming support for Bannerman seemingly reveals a shared understanding of just how inhospitable the music world can be toward Black women with pop ambitions. To be a Black woman in pop often means not being universally accepted, even by your own people. Early in her career, Whitney Houston—among the preeminent pop stars of all time—wasbooed at the 1989 Soul Train Awards. By that time, Houston achieved thebest-selling debut album by a solo artistand won 11 American Music Awards and a Grammy. But that didn't matter to some within the Black community who felt her music wastoopop.

Janet Jackson faced similar disrespect, but from whiter audiences. Her gargantuan musical legacy is often reduced to the2004 Super Bowl controversy, in which her wardrobe malfunctioned while performing, which derailed her reputation while reinforcing harmful tropes about Black women being hypersexual.

Today, there's a bit more room for Black female pop stars to thrive, though challenges remain. Superstars like Rihanna and Beyoncé are so massive that they've become their own brands. And although there are a growing number of Gen Z Black female singers with crossover appeal (Olivia Dean, PinkPantheress, Tyla), white women still comprise the bulk of pop success. Last year, the topglobal female artists on Spotifywere Taylor Swift, Billie Eilish, and Ariana Grande. Dance-pop singer Tinashe has publicly shared her frustration with not being taken seriously as a pop artist, sharing that she felt constrained to the R&B category at the onset of her career: "I feel like when I first got in the game, I really pushed against wanting to be put in a box or be pigeonholed,"she told ELLEin 2024.

Normani, the lone Black member of former girl group Fifth Harmony, has faced serious challenges, too. When she was part of the band, she enduredracist bullying online. After they disbanded in 2018, Normani set out to pursue a pop solo career, made promising by her 2019 single "Motivation" and the accompanying, nostalgia-filled video. But her debut albumDopaminedidn't arrive until 2024 and fell short ofmainstream success. Like Tinashe, Normani has publicly shared her struggles. "It's almost like [pop] becomes a negative when it's a Black girl that looks like me, singing the records that I choose to sing because I loved them," shetoldRolling Stonein 2020.

Whether they're solo artists or part of a group, Black women in pop spaces are long overdue for proper treatment and respect. They deserve to be celebrated, to carve their own lanes and freely express themselves, rather than be confined to stereotypes and dictated by the industry's assumptions.

Bannerman has remained relatively quiet since announcing her hiatus, but she shared a message to her supporters on herInstagram Storythis week: "I love you all more than words can describe," she wrote. Although it's unclear when or if Bannerman will return, the love she's received from fans and fellow musicians proves that more Black female pop stars are needed—even if the rest of the world isn't quite ready for them.

You Might Also Like

• The 15 Best Organic And Clean Shampoos For Any And All Hair Types

• 100 Gifts That Are $50 Or Under (And Look Way More Expensive Than They Actually Are)

byCustos Caelorum

in

February 28, 2026

Manon’s Katseye Hiatus Highlights an Isolating Journey for Black Women in Pop

"Hearst Magazines and Yahoo may earn commission or revenue on some items through these links." Bla...

Read More