Neil Young demands $10 million from Trump coalition over unlicensed rally anthem

Neil Young filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the Trump 47 Coalition, seeking $10 million in damages for the unlicensed use of his song “Rockin’ in the Free World” at a recent political rally. The complaint marks the second time the musician has taken legal action against a Trump-affiliated entity for playing the track.

Young’s legal team described the song as a critical commentary on American political rhetoric. The suit argues that the lyrics depict the struggles of the poor, homeless, and forgotten, contrasting these realities with the optimism of the repeated chorus. The filing states that the song is “the opposite of everything that Donald J. Trump stands for,” claiming the use of the track at a rally created a conflict between the music's message and the political context.

The core of the claim is copyright infringement. Young’s team asserts that the coalition did not hold a license to play the recording. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the new filing.

This dispute follows a similar legal action in 2020, when Young sued the Donald J. Trump for President campaign committee. In the current filing, Young notes that the previous group asserted no defense and settled shortly after being served. That settlement included a promise that the Trump campaign would not use the song again without a license and permission from Young.

The lawsuit adds to a growing list of friction between the music industry and the Trump administration. Young, a dual citizen of the United States and Canada, previously expressed concern about being barred from returning to the country during a European tour. Other prominent musicians, including Bruce Springsteen, Jack White, Sabrina Carpenter, and Olivia Rodrigo, have also clashed with the president.

The case is now in federal court, where Young seeks compensation for the specific use of the track at the rally. The coalition faces the task of defending its use of the song against the claim that it violated Young's exclusive rights.