Pokémon Company Responds After Homeland Security Video Uses Iconic Theme Song

The Pokémon Company has addressed public backlash after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) used the franchise’s iconic theme song and branding in a controversial immigration video. The clip, shared on social media by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), showed immigration raids set to the famous “Gotta Catch ’Em All” theme, sparking outrage online. The unauthorized use of Pokémon imagery and music quickly drew criticism from fans and rights advocates.

Viewers accused the DHS of dehumanizing immigrants by blending a children’s anime with real-life law enforcement actions. The video even included mock Pokémon-style “cards” for individuals arrested during raids. The Pokémon Company International responded with a clear statement distancing itself from the campaign and confirming that it had never granted permission for its intellectual property to be used.

Pokémon Company Condemns Unauthorized Use by Homeland Security

In an official statement, The Pokémon Company said it was “not involved in the creation or distribution” of the video and did not authorize the use of its characters, music, or branding. According to reports from outlets including BBC News and Associated Press, the company made it clear that the DHS’s actions violated its intellectual property rights.

The company did not announce legal action but emphasized protecting its brand image. Former Pokémon legal staff have noted that the firm is cautious about lawsuits in politically sensitive cases, describing the company as “publicity-shy.” Despite this, experts say the use of copyrighted material in government campaigns could raise legal and ethical questions, especially when tied to polarizing topics like immigration enforcement.

Rights groups and social media users slammed the video as insensitive, arguing that pairing a beloved childhood franchise with immigration raids trivializes the experiences of migrants. The backlash was swift, with fans tagging the company and demanding accountability. Calls for removal of the video intensified as the story spread across platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and Reddit.

Broader Impact and Public Reaction

This controversy has sparked debate over how government agencies use pop culture and copyrighted works to promote their messages. Legal experts told Reuters that while fair use arguments sometimes apply, campaigns with clear political undertones face stricter scrutiny. The DHS has not publicly commented on whether it sought permission before using the Pokémon theme.

For The Pokémon Company, the issue is reputational as much as legal. The franchise thrives on family-friendly content and global nostalgia. Any association with political or divisive campaigns risks alienating fans. The swift public statement shows the company’s intent to protect its image, especially as Pokémon remains a multibillion-dollar global brand with a large young audience.

The Pokémon Company’s response to the DHS video highlights the tension between intellectual property rights and government messaging. The company reaffirmed its independence and distanced itself from the Homeland Security campaign, making clear that the Pokémon brand does not endorse the controversial immigration message.

FYI (keeping you in the loop)-

Q1: What did the Pokémon Company say about the DHS video?

The Pokémon Company said it was not involved in the video and did not grant permission to use its theme song or branding.

Q2: Why is the DHS video controversial?

It used Pokémon’s theme and imagery to depict immigration raids, which many saw as dehumanizing and politically insensitive.

Q3: Will the Pokémon Company sue over the video?

Legal experts say it’s possible but unlikely, as the company is cautious about politically charged litigation.

Q4: How did fans react to the DHS using Pokémon content?

Fans criticized the campaign online, calling it offensive and demanding the video be removed.

Q5: What does this mean for government use of pop culture?

It raises concerns about copyright misuse and the ethics of mixing entertainment brands with political campaigns.