Many defended Macklemore for saying ‘Free Palestine.’ Where were they when Melissa Barrera did the same?
)
- Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
There was an uptick in “Free Palestine” discourse over recent weeks after Macklemore was kicked off Ed Sheeran’s U.S. tour as an opener for his speech about Palestinian liberation at a Sept. 4 concert. Additionally, actor Mark Ruffalo, who has been vocal in his support for Palestinians amid Israel’s deadly war against Gaza, was accused of perpetuating “antisemitic tropes” by leadership at Paramount when the “Avengers” star criticized the company’s upcoming merger.
A few years back, Macklemore and Ruffalo’s stance may have been a publicity nightmare for them, but the two have overwhelmingly received support for their statements. The other openers on Sheeran’s tour — including Billie Eilish collaborator Finneas — dropped out in solidarity with Macklemore’s cause, and online discourse has largely backed the “Thrift Shop” rapper. In response to Paramount’s accusation against Ruffalo, more than 150 prominent Jewish figures signed an open letter defending the actor.
It was great to see the two so firmly supported, but both situations had me thinking about how much high-profile Latinas like Melissa Barrera and Rachel Zegler had to put up with when they showed solidarity with Palestinians over the last few years.
In November 2023, Barrera was dropped from her starring role in the horror franchise film “Scream VII” after she shared pro-Palestinian statements on social media that some believed crossed a line into antisemitic territory. Though there were pockets of support for her, there wasn’t a wave of backers in the same way as for Macklemore and Ruffalo.
And that hasn’t gone unnoticed by Barrera.
“It was so beautiful to see Finneas and the band and all the opening acts pulling out in support of Macklemore. It made me emotional,” Barrera said in a recent interview with the Associated Press. “You know, I didn’t get that when it happened to me. I didn’t have any of that happen. It was too soon. People were too scared. But it’s good to see that almost three years later, at least things have changed.”
It was a very gracious response on her end. She could’ve, rightfully, been more critical of how weakly people responded to her situation. Instead she kept the focus on standing up for Palestinians and supporting those who share her beliefs.
But she should’ve been more publicly lauded. It was a braver position for her to take, not only because public sentiment on the Israel-Gaza conflict had not caught up to her viewpoint, but because a Latina will always have more to lose than straight, white guys.
I don’t want to minimize anyone’s activism as much as I want to give Barrera her flowers.
She lost her job in a blockbuster movie series for her political positions and refused to apologize for them, no matter what they cost her. And she’s continued to be a vocal advocate for Palestinians.
Barrera doubled down on her views in interviews with The Times in 2024 and again in 2025. She also has launched her own production company to create a safe space for artists with loud progressive views and inclusive stories.
The “In the Heights” star recently executive produced the documentary film “Traces of Home,” which follows filmmaker Colette Ghunim as she travels with her family to her father’s homeland in the former Palestinian city of Safed and her mother’s native Mexico for the first time since both parents were forcibly displaced decades ago.
In 2024, Zegler voiced her support for Palestinians in a reply to a post on X in which she promoted her role in the Disney live-action remake of “Snow White.” The movie’s producer — and one of the more powerful film execs in Hollywood — Marc Platt personally reached out to the “West Side Story” star asking her to delete her “Free Palestine” post.
Zegler refused to do so.
This was especially defiant as Zegler’s co-star in the Disney film was Gal Gadot, who served in the Israeli army and has continued to voice support for her home country.
What makes Barrera and Zegler’s stands so courageous was the timing of their statements — they were both at the peak of their star power — and the fact that they were willing to put their necks out, risking potential roles as Latina roles have continually been reduced in Hollywood over recent years.
So let’s not forget that the road to white praise was paved by Latinas.
Is Trump losing his hold on South Florida?
Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) bumped up against President Trump’s immigration enforcement tactics in a recent political ad.
“Mr. President, some of your immigration enforcement efforts have gone too far,” Salazar said in the commercial.
It’s a surprising turn from her usual lock-step allegiance to the Republican Party.
Born to Cuban exiles, Salazar presides over Florida’s 27th Congressional District, which includes Miami’s famous Little Havana neighborhood. She flipped the seat in 2020 by narrowly defeating Democrat Donna Shalala after receiving an endorsement from Trump.
Her district is nearly 75% Latino and has historically been politically purple.
A summertime poll of Latino Floridians showed that 51% disapproved of Trump’s performance in the White House, while 20% of Latino voters who supported Trump in 2024 said they wouldn’t back him again.
Salazar’s message came after several recent polls found that she is neck and neck with Democratic challenger Eliott Rodriguez for the congressional seat.
In the video, she also noted that 50% of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees in the month of July had no criminal record, according to ICE data.
“Be careful what your advisors are telling you about immigration policy,” Salazar continued in the ad. “The same Hispanics who helped you get to the White House in 2024 feel betrayed today.”
In response to the video, Trump said he disagreed with Salazar’s opposition to his immigration policies, but that he would still be endorsing her in her upcoming reelection bid.
The entire incident points to a potentially growing rift between Trump and his loyal Cuban voting base in South Florida.
“[Salazar had] to establish some independence and distance and say, I’m going to stand up to [Trump] when it matters,” political consultant and Latino vote whisperer Mike Madrid told The Times. “But this is not about immigration as much as it is about distancing from a very bad Trump brand.”
As Madrid puts it, Salazar’s opposition to Trump is not an attempt to bring people back to the Republican side, but a maneuver to prevent more people from leaving it. He noted that Republicans nationwide are in full damage-control mode as a “blue wave” appears imminent during the 2026 midterm elections.
“For the first time, Donald Trump is a bigger liability than an asset among Republicans,” Madrid said. “It’s always been, ‘you can’t live with him, you can’t live without him’ for independents. But with Republicans, it was the ‘you can’t live without him’ part — now you can live without him.”
Austin ICE shooting
On Sunday, an ICE officer shot Wilber Rafael Garces Perez while he was making a DoorDash delivery in Austin, Texas.
The 28-year-old Venezuelan national said ICE agents sideswiped his car and then shot him in the back as he tried to park his vehicle. He also claimed he was treated for his injury at a hospital, but was taken into ICE’s custody before the bullet was removed from his body. Garces Perez’s attorney later said his client was returned to the hospital Monday.
The Department of Homeland Security has not confirmed that Garces Perez was shot in the back.
“This person is an illegal alien who has no legal status to be here and has been given some of the best medical care he’s ever received in his life,” Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin said Tuesday. “No amount of smears and false narratives will slow down ICE from doing its job by removing dangerous illegal aliens from our communities and making America safe again.”
In a statement, ICE said Garces Perez was “the subject of a targeted vehicle stop” and that it “does not and would not advise, nor be the authority on, a medical procedure for an illegal alien at a hospital.”
As of Tuesday, Garces Perez was being held at an ICE Processing Center in Pearsall, Texas — more than 130 miles southwest of Austin.
A U.S. District Court judge scheduled a Sept. 30 hearing for Garces Perez’s case. The Venezuelan national’s lawyer noted that the court date has effectively barred ICE from being able to deport her client before then.
Stories we read this week that we think you should read
Unless otherwise noted, stories below were published by the Los Angeles Times.
Politics and immigration
- Sons, mothers of people killed by ICE agents demand answers: ‘We still have so many questions’
- The U.S. freed political prisoners in Nicaragua. Now Trump is trying to deport them
- Newsom signs bills to regulate data center industry, criticizes Trump for inaction
- High cost of living tops voter concerns, Becerra remains front-runner in governor’s race, new poll shows
- California deal on Paramount-Warner Bros. merger spurs frustration, questions about political pressure
- ICE hides locations of thousands of detainees with final removal orders (AP)
- Judge strikes down a Trump policy barring some immigrants from Head Start preschools (AP)
- Many Venezuelan immigrants shun Florida and turn to smaller cities in Utah, elsewhere (AP)
Arts and entertainment
- Xavi grew up on his latest album, ‘Dosis.’ Now he’s a Latin Grammy nominee
- ‘We opened Pandora’s box:’ Mexican rock trio the Warning defies all expectations
- Freaked out by ‘AI slop menus’? They might be — gulp 🤢 — here to stay
- Don Francisco’s new talk show ‘Gigantes’ sets October premiere date
- Tequila Mockingbird, L.A. punk’s great archivist, is still pissed off and spectacular
- Why are queer L.A. nightclubs disappearing from Facebook and Instagram?
Southern California
- L.A.’s mayoral ad blitz is here: Hollywood, ICE raids and homeless encampments
- ‘Woefully inadequate’: Bass orders review of how LAPD deals with mentally ill people
- Beloved Lakers public address announcer Lawrence Tanter dies at 76
- Troubled LAX people mover delayed again — and it might not be the last time
- Death of Presley Gerber, Cindy Crawford’s son, sparks questions over drug supplier, L.A. luxury rehab center
- Lithium-ion battery fire keeps hundreds of homes under evacuation orders for second day
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The article argues that the widespread support for Macklemore’s “Free Palestine” statement and for Mark Ruffalo’s criticism of Paramount represents a meaningful change in how prominent pro-Palestinian speech is received. Reuters reported that Macklemore’s removal from Ed Sheeran’s tour prompted the other opening acts and Sheeran’s band to withdraw in solidarity.[6]
At the same time, the piece contends that Melissa Barrera and Rachel Zegler faced greater professional risks when they expressed similar views earlier, particularly because they are Latina performers working in an industry with limited opportunities for Latina representation. Barrera was removed from Scream VII after sharing posts describing Israel’s conduct in Gaza as “genocide and ethnic cleansing.”[2]
The article maintains that Barrera’s statements were courageous because they came while her career was gaining momentum, and because she continued defending Palestinian rights after losing a major role. NPR reported that Barrera condemned antisemitism and Islamophobia while continuing to advocate for Palestinians after her dismissal.[1]
More broadly, the piece suggests that public support for Macklemore arrived only after women such as Barrera and Zegler had already absorbed significant professional consequences for comparable activism. It therefore urges readers to recognize Latina artists as earlier—and insufficiently acknowledged—participants in the current shift in public opinion.
Different views on the topic
Critics of the article’s comparison argue that Barrera’s case was not simply a punishment for supporting Palestinians. Spyglass Media said her posts crossed into antisemitism and hate speech, citing what the company characterized as false references to genocide, Holocaust distortion and an implication that Western media conceal Israel’s perspective.[3][5]
That distinction is also reflected in reporting that identified particular posts as potentially invoking a longstanding antisemitic trope about Jewish control of the media, rather than merely criticizing the Israeli government or expressing solidarity with Palestinian civilians.[4] From this perspective, removing Barrera was presented as a response to language viewed as discriminatory, not to the broader political position of supporting Palestinian rights.
The Macklemore episode likewise generated a contrasting argument: critics said a concert opening act should not use a shared entertainment platform for what they regarded as a one-sided political message. The Israeli-American Council and other Jewish advocacy groups objected to his speech and performance, while venue owner Robert Kraft cited what he called a broader history of antisemitic rhetoric and said the venue would not provide a platform for hate speech.[7][9]
Macklemore rejected those accusations, saying that criticism of Israel and opposition to Zionism should not be conflated with hostility toward Jewish people.[8] However, the opposing view holds that intent does not eliminate the impact of rhetoric that some Jewish audiences and organizations regard as threatening or rooted in antisemitic ideas.
Finally, supporters of the industry’s decisions contend that employers and venues have legitimate responsibilities to protect audiences and employees from hate speech, regardless of an entertainer’s race or gender. The resulting debate is therefore not only about unequal support for Latina artists, but also about where institutions should draw the line between political advocacy, criticism of a government and language that targets or endangers an ethnic or religious group.
