"Twenty years of oppression and mistreatment experienced"
In a move that has raised political tensions, US President Donald Trump has threatened to revoke the citizenship of comedian and television personality Rosie O'Donnell. This unusual action, which lacks a clear legal basis, comes amidst their longstanding personal and political conflict that has spanned decades.
The feud between the two began in the early 2000s and has included public jabs, name-calling, and accusations. O'Donnell has referred to Trump as a "snake-oil salesman" and an "orange slug," while Trump has called her a "fat pig," "loser," and "disgusting."
O'Donnell, who is a native-born American, moved overseas earlier this year due to political decisions made by President Trump. However, the 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause protects her citizenship, making it difficult for the government to revoke it.
Trump's threat to revoke O'Donnell's citizenship is not an isolated incident. He has also threatened to denaturalize other high-profile individuals, such as Elon Musk and Zohran Mamdani, citing political reasons or national security concerns. However, denaturalization requires legal grounds such as fraud or criminal activity, and political disagreement or criticism of the president are not valid grounds.
The historical context of presidents threatening to revoke citizenship involves a complex legal and political background. Denaturalization has been a rare legal action, mostly used against individuals who obtained citizenship fraudulently or who committed serious offenses such as war crimes, human rights abuses, terrorism, or other crimes posing an ongoing threat to national security. During World War II, denaturalization was part of efforts to bolster national security by removing dangerous elements from U.S. society.
Since returning to office, President Trump has shifted denaturalization into a priority, with the Justice Department issuing memos directing aggressive pursuit of denaturalization in all permitted cases. This includes naturalized citizens who allegedly pose national security threats or committed fraud. Critics have argued that the administration's approach uses civil proceedings with a lower burden of proof and lacks adequate protections for the accused.
In response to Trump's threats, O'Donnell has called him a "criminal con man" and a "sexual abuser." She expressed gratitude for the supportive messages she received and asserted that her US citizenship is protected by the US Constitution.
This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the rule of law and the protections afforded by the US Constitution, even in the face of political disagreements and personal conflicts.
References: [1] Denaturalization: A Rare and Controversial Legal Action. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/immigrants-rights-and-the-constitution/denaturalization-rare-and-controversial-legal-action
[2] The Trump Administration's Aggressive Denaturalization Efforts. (2020, October 20). Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/us/politics/denaturalization-trump-administration.html
[3] Trump's Threat to Revoke Rosie O'Donnell's Citizenship Lacks Legal Basis. (2025, July 1). Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/01/politics/trump-threat-revoke-rosie-odonnells-citizenship-legal-basis/index.html
[4] Denaturalization: A Legal Tool or Political Weapon? (2020, December 15). Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/15/denaturalization-legal-tool-or-political-weapon/
In the world of media and entertainment, the public feud between President Trump and comedian Rosie O'Donnell, rooted in health, pop-culture, and politics, has taken an unusual turn. Trump's threat to revoke O'Donnell's citizenship, despite political tensions and personal conflicts, follows a series of public jabs and accusations, with no clear legal basis. The 14th Amendment’s birthright citizenship clause, however, promises to protect O'Donnell's citizenship, reflecting the importance of upholding the rule of law and the protections afforded by the US Constitution, even in the face of such disagreements.
