Can Trump Really Strip Citizenship from Elon Musk, Zohran Mamdani, and Rosie O’Donnell?

Introduction: A Political Storm Over Citizenship

In recent weeks, President Donald Trump has stirred controversy by suggesting that the U.S. citizenship of high-profile figures like Elon Musk, Zohran Mamdani, and Rosie O’Donnell could be at risk. What do the world’s richest man, a New York City mayoral candidate, and a comedian-turned-activist have in common? They’ve all publicly clashed with Trump, and now he’s hinted at targeting their citizenship as part of his broader immigration agenda. But can a president legally strip citizenship from Americans, and what does this mean for the future of political dissent? Let’s dive into the facts, the law, and the implications of these bold statements.

Who Are the Players in This Drama?

• Elon Musk: The billionaire CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, born in South Africa and a naturalized U.S. citizen since 2002, was once a Trump ally. Their relationship soured over disagreements on policies like tax breaks for electric vehicles. Trump recently told reporters he’d “take a look” at deporting Musk, hinting at denaturalization.

• Zohran Mamdani: A democratic socialist and New York City mayoral candidate, Mamdani was born in Uganda and became a U.S. citizen in 2018. Trump threatened to arrest and deport him for opposing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations, with some Republicans falsely claiming that Mamdani’s citizenship was obtained fraudulently.

• Rosie O’Donnell: The outspoken comedian and former co-host of The View, born in New York, has feuded with Trump for nearly two decades. After moving to Ireland in January 2025 following Trump’s re-election, she criticized his administration’s handling of Texas floods. Trump responded on Truth Social, calling her a “Threat to Humanity” and musing about revoking her citizenship.

The Legal Landscape: Can Citizenship Be Revoked?

The idea of stripping citizenship raises serious legal questions. The U.S. Constitution, particularly the 14th Amendment, guarantees citizenship to those born in the U.S., like O’Donnell, and protects naturalized citizens, like Musk and Mamdani, under specific conditions. Here’s a breakdown:

• Birthright Citizenship (O’Donnell): The 14th Amendment ensures that anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen, and a 1967 Supreme Court ruling (Afroyim v. Rusk) established that the government cannot revoke citizenship without the individual’s consent, except in rare cases like voluntary renunciation or treason. Legal experts, including CNN’s Steve Vladeck, call Trump’s threat against O’Donnell “patently unconstitutional.”

• Naturalized Citizenship (Musk and Mamdani): Naturalized citizens can face denaturalization, but only under strict conditions, such as fraud or misrepresentation during the naturalization process. For example, if Musk or Mamdani lied about material facts (e.g., criminal history or terrorist affiliations) when applying for citizenship, the government could pursue denaturalization. However, political differences or public criticism of the president are not legal grounds for this process.

• Denaturalization Trends: Historically, denaturalizations were rare, averaging 11 cases per year from 1990 to 2017. During Trump’s first term, the Justice Department prioritized denaturalization, opening a dedicated office that increased filings. The Biden administration closed this office, but Trump’s second term has revived plans to ramp up denaturalization as part of immigration crackdowns.

What Did Trump Say, Exactly?

Trump’s comments have been vague but provocative:

• On Musk: When asked about deporting Musk, Trump said, “I don’t know, I mean, we’ll have to take a look.” He also posted on Truth Social that without subsidies, Musk might “close up shop and head back home to South Africa.”

• On Mamdani: Trump baselessly claimed, “A lot of people are saying he’s here illegally,” and threatened to arrest him if he interferes with ICE operations. Republican Rep. Andy Ogles called for an investigation into Mamdani’s citizenship, citing alleged support for terrorism based on a rap song lyric.

• On O’Donnell: Trump’s Truth Social post on July 12, 2025, stated, “Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship.” He suggested she stay in Ireland, where she moved after his re-election.

These statements align with Trump’s broader push to redefine citizenship, including efforts to end birthright citizenship for children of non-citizen parents, which is currently stalled in court.

The Responses: Defiance and Pushback

• Musk: The tech mogul responded cryptically on X, saying, “So tempting to escalate this. So, so tempting. But I will refrain for now.” He’s denied past accusations of working illegally in the U.S. early in his career.

• Mamdani: The mayoral candidate condemned Trump’s threats, stating, “The President of the United States just threatened to have me arrested, stripped of my citizenship, put in a detention camp, and deported. Not because I have broken any law, but because I will refuse to let ICE terrorize our city.”

• O’Donnell: Never one to back down, O’Donnell fired back on Instagram, comparing Trump to “King Joffrey with a tangerine spray tan” and calling him a “criminal con man.” She also posted a photo of Trump with Jeffrey Epstein, escalating their long-running feud.

Why These Threats Matter

Trump’s remarks aren’t just personal vendettas—they signal a broader strategy to use citizenship as a political weapon. His administration’s focus on denaturalization and immigration crackdowns raises concerns about targeting critics, especially naturalized citizens. While O’Donnell’s birthright citizenship is constitutionally protected, Musk and Mamdani could theoretically face scrutiny if the government fabricates grounds like fraud. However, legal experts like Michael Kagan argue that such moves are “irresponsible rhetoric designed to intimidate political opponents.”

The timing is also telling. Trump’s threats come amid other controversies, including criticism over FEMA’s response to Texas floods and disputes over Jeffrey Epstein’s files. By targeting high-profile figures, Trump may be deflecting attention from these issues while rallying his base.

The Bigger Picture: Citizenship and Free Speech

These threats raise chilling questions about free speech and political dissent. If a president can publicly muse about stripping citizenship from critics, what message does that send to everyday Americans? Mamdani’s case, in particular, has sparked accusations of racism and Islamophobia, given the baseless claims about his citizenship and faith.

For naturalized citizens, who make up over 25 million Americans, the revival of denaturalization efforts could create a climate of fear. Even if Trump’s threats are legally toothless, they normalize the idea of citizenship as conditional, undermining the principles of equality and due process.

What’s Next?

The courts will likely play a critical role. A federal judge recently blocked Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, and any attempt to denaturalize Musk or Mamdani would face legal hurdles. The Supreme Court’s 1967 ruling sets a high bar for revoking citizenship, and even naturalized citizens are entitled to robust judicial review.

Public reaction has been mixed. On X, some users speculate about Musk’s early immigration status, while others call Trump’s threats a dangerous overreach. The corporate media, as one X user noted, often “both sides” these issues, framing them as political spats rather than authoritarian tactics.

Conclusion: A Test for Democracy

Trump’s threats to strip citizenship from Elon Musk, Zohran Mamdani, and Rosie O’Donnell may be more bluster than reality, but they reflect a troubling willingness to weaponize citizenship against political foes. While O’Donnell’s birthright citizenship is secure, Musk and Mamdani’s naturalized status could, in theory, be challenged, though no credible evidence supports such action. These comments underscore the fragility of democratic norms when power is used to silence dissent.

As the nation grapples with these unprecedented threats, it’s worth asking: Where do we draw the line? Can a president’s rhetoric alone undermine the rule of law? And what does it mean for the future of free speech in America?

Thought-Provoking Questions

• Should there be stronger legal safeguards to protect naturalized citizens from politically motivated denaturalization attempts?

• How can the media better address authoritarian rhetoric without normalizing it as just another political feud?

• What role should public figures like Musk and O’Donnell play in challenging threats to democratic principles?