Trump Declares Rosie O'donnell Threat To Humanity -- Says He's Considering Revoking Her Citizenship

[MayReasonRule]

Bari Weiss must have a team of 40 people assigned to tackle this story

— Bill Grueskin (@bgrueskin.bsky.social) 2025-07-12T14:15:54.953Z

It's on reddit now.
https://old.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1ly4243/donald_trump_threatens_to_revoke_rosie_odonnells

Appears to be legit.

[Kid Berwyn]

1. Now if he were a real NAZI, he'd order her disappearance.

Stay tuned…

[Eliot Rosewater]

52. I hope everybody realizes, now, that the only reason he hasn't

Deported or imprisoned or killed all non MAGA is he can't yet, but he will if we don't do something very drastic very soon.

I recently revisited a liberal message board where others always jumped on me when I said things like "Maga will absolutely engage in killing us or support Trump doing it without hesitation" and asked them if they remembered me saying that and their reaction. They were silent.

l did it here a lot too, just like now where I post video and podcast showing a near certainty musk and team interfered with this election, I am constantly jumped on.

sigh

[Kid Berwyn]

54. The approach is made to seem random.

But the same players seem always to pop up.



It's like they volunteered or somethin'.

[Walleye]

2. So, in other words, he scared to death of Rosie O'Donnell?

Did the Supreme Court give him the right to revoke people’s citizenship? Why do other Republicans put up with this shit?

[republianmushroom]

3. Does this mean if Dems take the WH in 2028

they can take the citizenship of the whole damn trump family ?

[dweller]

5. They can just go back

And denaturalize rapey grampy’s rapey grampy …

🤔



✌🏻

[DBoon]

20. and this is why birtright citizenship is so important

Without it, you can go back far enough in anyone's family tree, decide that an immigrant in this tree did not arrive legally, and revoke the citizenship of all their descendants.

[BonnieJW]

31. Like President Putz's mother?

Let's deported him. But probably no country will take him

[mucholderthandirt]

43. The funny thing about that is, there wasn't any "legal" or "illegal" back in the first days.

Anybody could come here. And did. The native citizens here didn't give the Pilgrims permission, or anyone after that. They just came.

Hell, on both sides of my family, we started coming here before there was even an "America" to come to! In about 1600, people from my father's and mother's families immigrated (from Scotland and Germany, respectively). My father's people to NC, and my mother's first to Pennsylvania and later down to NC.

But some of my ancestors are actually those first "Americans", and have been here for something like 25,000 years. So, how far back are we going to go? Because I think we should start with Trump's spawn and go back a few generations of his family first.

[Totally Tunsie]

26. Oh, please let it be so!

[lapfog_1]

28. fuck that... revoke the citizenship of all MAGA

arrest them, deport them to various war zones around the world or to concentration camps... and seize and auction off all their property ( thus finally reducing the debt ).

[Nictuku]

33. Wouldn't that make us as horrible as they are?

The best revenge would be to politically, through elections, keep them out of the majority for the next 40 years.

[Mossfern]

4. When is the Republican party going to realize

and admit that this guy is bat shit crazy and needs to be removed from office before he kills us all.
How can they put up with this mishegoss?

Shame on them.

[LS0999]

11. They are just as insane as him

He needs to be removed from office and locked up but Rs will support another one spewing the same garbage.

[Mossfern]

15. Sorry

The naive me just doesn't get it.
I felt the same way about Viet Nam in the 1960's.

It must be something in the water or some biological warfare.
How has the US spawned so many sadists?

[GoneOffShore]

18. They have always been in the US. The Constitution was written to preserve the rights of rich white guys.

[whathehell]

41. Sadists have 'always been' in every human society

and population. Their numbers are not confined
to particular nations.

Historically speaking, governing in the interests of the rich and powerful has been the universal norm, not an 'exception' exemplified by the US.

[MayReasonRule]

47. Well Said!

[whathehell]

49. Thank you..

Great minds think alike!

[MayReasonRule]

46. Fascists Are Without Shame -- Fascists Embrace Depraved Malevolence As Their Purpose And Creed

Fascism is defined by 'mishegoss'.

The GOP is a wholly fascist, ongoing criminal enterprise intent upon forevermore establishing a fascist oligarchy beholden to none.

All of those that support the same are the same.

Thus the mishegoss you're referencing defines the GOP and all of their supporters.

Happy Sunday to ya' and thank you for my newest word of the day...
'mishegoss' originating from the Hebrew word "meshuga," meaning "crazy" or "insane.

[kentuck]

6. Can someone tell him he doesn't have the authority to take away someone's citizenship?

Could someone disabuse him of his fantasies?

[tavernier]

21. The SCOTUS just read your post

and are calling a meeting in an hour to pass a new law giving Rump that authority. They thank you and ask for forgiveness for their short sightedness.

[Kingofalldems]

7. He's distracting the MAGAts from the Epstein files.

[johnnyfins]

9. BINGO

[dalton99a]

22. +1

[Ping Tung]

8. For his next display of dignity he will moon Taylor Swift and Meryl Streep at his next televised press conference.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Yep, seems a real post - many outlets reporting it

eg https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/trump-revoking-rosie-odonnell-citizenship-ireland-1236454080/

What the fuck is he on?

[DSandra]

12. This is not just about Rosie, this smells like Trump choosing his arch-rival to test revoking citizenship...

of even American born people, if he goes through with the threat. Such a power could be extreme punishment to anyone he doesn't like, and such a tactic was used by the Nazis earlier on to attack Jewish people back then.

[MineralMan]

13. He Might Want to Do That, but Even a President Can't.

She was born in New York State, according to Wikipedia. As a natural, native-born American, there is no mechanism for removing her citizenship. Trump can't do it. Nobody can.

All of which demonstrates that Donald J. Trump is an ignoramus whose understanding of the Constitution is seriously limited.

So, she can simply tell him to pound some sand.

[DBoon]

55. He will invent a mechanism and his supreme court will rubber stamp it

He got away with leading a violent attempt to overthrow the US government, anything is possibel.

[MineralMan]

57. Perhaps, but I think that's very doubtful.

[TheBlackAdder]

14. That sounds like somebody exceeding their presidential authority.

[Bettie]

17. It does, but he also has the SCOTUS

which seems to be delighted to do his bidding most of the time.

[flvegan]

16. 77 million people voted for this. Think about that. n/t

[ProfessorGAC]

19. Way Too Many...

...weren't actually paying attention.
They just wanted cheaper groceries & gas which he promised on day one.
Dopes!

[MayReasonRule]

29. 263 Million United States Citizens Did Not Vote For Donald Trump, 77 Million Did Vote For Him

Think about that.

[flvegan]

34. I'm not sure if

you think that number might be a positive or not.

Because it's not.

[MayReasonRule]

37. Depends Upon How You Think About It... : -)

Here's to the restoration of our freedoms through our nation's return to reason's rule.

[dalton99a]

23. Kick

[newdeal2]

24. Rosie has been right all the time

Even back when this feud started, I couldn’t believe how Trump was acting.

[orleans]

44. where was that post from? do you have a link? nt

[MayReasonRule]

48. Here Ya' Go orleans...

Click Picture To Go To Rosie's Instagram Page

Happy Sunday to ya'!

[AllaN01Bear]

25. deflecting and projecting donald?

[appleannie1]

27. Like a 5 yr old threatening to tell mommy on big brother.

[Nigrum Cattus]

30. More distraction so we don't talk about

Texas flood failure, Epstein, military occupation of L.A., etc.

[D. Spaulding]

32. Trumps facing a lot of problems right now; this is just a distraction

he's trying to get us to pay attention to something other than the way his MAGA minions are at war over Epstein, his court losses, the unpopularity of his policies ,etc.

[Starbeach]

35. NYers

Rosie speaks for all New Yorkers who knew Trump as a pathetic buffoon who needs constant attention. We couldn't believe the rest of the country was seduced by him.

Save us, Rosie!

[kimbutgar]

36. He is such a petty ass baby

Wah wah my feelings are hurt and I don’t like it!

[Wiz Imp]

38. Rosie O'donnell, a Threat To Humanity? Her only "crime" is disliking Donald Trump

How weak can he be? She doesn't even live in the US, and her only comments about Trump these days generally come when she is interviewed. She's not really making unsolicited criticisms of Trump at this point.

[mkp]

39. You MagaPublicans better huddle together and begin PRAYING I do not become President

My first ORDER; all republicans and maga will be deported to Antartica immediately!
Order#2; replace the Supreme Court Justices that were deported!
Order#3; all former Dem Presidents shall assist in rebuilding America, better than before
Order#4; ALL REPUBLICAN MONIES (no matter where) SHALL BE CONFISCATED {they won't need it}
Order#5; ---- I will place a $ Zillion $ dollar Tariff on Antartica
Order#6 Murder-A-Largo shall be given special status as a place any migrant may seek safe harbor,,, and if ever another President of Evil shall arise he shall be Taken By Force to Murder-A- Largo and given over to whom he has been Evil towards.
Order#7 Rosie O'Donnel may have free access of her choice [phone,video, or in person] to Donald Trump in Antartica, and may also have the exclusive RIGHT to have done with Donald Trump as tickels her fancy.

Elections have consequences! Elect me. And watch the retaliation against MagaPublicanism for their Evil.

[orangecrush]

40. She got the fuck out

I and many others can't leave.

I believe she made the correct choice.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

42. Rosie's response made me smile

Link to tweet

Rosie O’Donnell responds to Donald Trump’s threat to revoke her citizenship in a post on Instagram alongside a photo of him with his best friend Jeffrey Epstein: “hey donald - you're rattled again? 18 years later and I still live rent-free in that collapsing brain of yours. you call me a threat to humanity - but l'm everything you fear: a loud woman. a queer woman. a mother who tells the truth. an american who got out of the country b4 u set it ablaze you build walls - I build a life for my autistic kid in a country where decency still exists. you crave loyalty - I teach my children to question power you sell fear on golf courses - I make art about surviving trauma you lie, you steal, you degrade - I nurture, I create, I persist. you are everything that is wrong with america - and I'm everything you hate about what's still right with it you want to revoke my citizenship? go ahead and try, king joffrey with a tangerine spray tan. I’m not yours to silence. I never was. Rosie 🇮🇪”

[Martin Eden]

45. Imagine if President Biden had made those statements about a harsh critic

Posting on social media "threat to humanity" and "revoke citizenship."

Not only would every Republican be screaming from the rooftops that Biden is an insane tyrant, the liberal media would admit the cheese slipped off Joe's cracker.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

50. Professor Vladeck- Denaturalization and Expatriation

Here is a good analysis of denaturalization. It would be almost impossible for trump to strip Rosie of her citizenship without a nasty lawsuit

With President Trump threatening to revoke Rosie O’Donnell’s citizenship, it seems like a good time to re-up my explainer on denaturalization and expatriation — and why what Trump is suggesting is … not viable:

— Steve Vladeck (@stevevladeck.bsky.social) 2025-07-12T18:40:26.584Z

https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/146-denaturalization-and-expatriation

For good reasons, it is difficult to denaturalize a U.S. citizen and even harder to expatriate one. As this week’s “Long Read” documents, Congress has provided for only a handful of circumstances in which the executive branch is empowered to pursue such a move; and the Supreme Court has recognized meaningful constitutional limits (and an entitlement to meaningful judicial review) even in those cases. As we’re seeing so often with the current administration, there may well be a legal avenue for at least some of what it appears to want to accomplish, but that legal avenue has too much, you know, law, interposing both substantive limits and procedural requirements between the President and his policy preferences......

Historically, and for good reasons, it has been exceptionally difficult for the government to involuntarily revoke an American’s citizenship. 8 U.S.C. § 1481 identifies seven classes of activities that can subject citizens to a loss of citizenship:

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or

(4)(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or

(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or

(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

As should be clear from this list, most of the circumstances involve behavior in which an individual has manifested a specific and voluntary desire to surrender their citizenship—and not when citizenship has been revoked as a punishment. And even for subsection (a)(7), the one part that doesn’t seem to require that on its face, the statute today includes an umbrella condition—that loss of citizenship depends upon whether the individual “voluntarily perform[ed] any of the [specified] acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality.”......

Section 1481 applies to all U.S. citizens. For naturalized citizens (i.e., those who become citizens after birth), there’s one additional basis for revoking citizenship—and that’s if and only if their citizenship was “illegally procured or . . . procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation.” Here, too, the statute (and, almost certainly, the Constitution) requires notice and meaningful judicial review before an American’s citizenship can be stripped. As 8 U.S.C. § 1451(b) mandates,

The party to whom was granted the naturalization alleged to have been illegally procured or procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation shall, in any such proceedings under subsection (a) of this section, have sixty days’ personal notice, unless waived by such party, in which to make answers to the petition of the United States . . . .

Of course, the government can pursue denaturalization on broader grounds than it can pursue expatriation—since the Constitution doesn’t create a substantive right to naturalization in the same way it does for birthright citizenship. But the key is that here, too, the Supreme Court has regularly insisted not only on meaningful judicial review of denaturalization proceedings, but on construing the relevant statutes narrowly—including, most recently, in 2017. (For much more on the complexities of denaturalization, see this fantastic February 2020 “Practice Advisory” from the National Lawyers Guild and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.)

In other words, although denaturalization is potentially available in more cases than expatriation, it still requires meaningful, individualized judicial review—review that holds the government to a significant burden in providing that an individual wrongfully obtained their citizenship, and not just that they engaged in questionable behavior thereafter. There is, simply, no easy, fast path to revoking any American’s citizenship without their consent—and there hasn’t been for decades. That may not stop the current administration from trying it anyway, or from removing citizens unlawfully and then resisting the legal consequences. But it’s important to be clear on what the actual legal authority for such maneuvers would be. Here, there isn’t any.

I was so sad to see Professor Vladeck leave the University of Texas Law School.

[Bayard]

56. I posted this to your similar thread

Jesus Pete! Is this what he's threatening now?!

Just because he doesn't like someone? We're all going to a third-world country then.

#7 describes him perfectly. It is incomprehensible to me why Congress did not convict him of insurrection.

[0rganism]

51. Wait, am I confused or did King Trump just decree that Rosie O'Donnell be exiled?

I don't think I like this series. The plot makes no sense, the pacing is uneven, and the acting sucks. Even the effects and make-up are lousy. It's like the producers didn't give the slightest fuck about audience retention.

[Raven123]

53. Once again Trump pushing the system to see what he can get away with