Rosie O’Donnell’s long-running feud with Donald Trump has officially become an international affair, and it’s not going well for her.
After her complaints were rejected by three different circuit courts in the United States, the comedian took her fight across the Atlantic. The European Union Court of Civil Justice reviewed her 18-page complaint and dismissed it without prejudice. “Without prejudice” simply means she could technically try again, though nobody in Brussels seems eager for that. The judges reportedly didn’t mince words, calling the complaint “absolutely baseless” and adding that Rosie and her attorneys “should be ashamed of themselves.”
It’s a stunning rebuke from a body that normally prefers dry, careful language. One observer said the ruling read “less like a legal opinion and more like a disappointed parent’s note.”
The bad news for Rosie didn’t stop in Brussels. Courts in the United Kingdom and Ireland were also spared from dealing with her complaints, meaning the filings never made it far enough to become their problem. Considering that Rosie relocated to Ireland herself, some found that detail especially funny.
“She moved there to get away from him, and then tried to use the courts there to keep fighting him,” said Alex Bruno, a Boston bartender who says the story has become a regular topic at his bar. “That’s not moving on. That’s bringing your ex to your new apartment.”
Rosie’s history with Trump goes back almost twenty years, to a televised feud that neither of them ever really let go of. Over time, it turned from late-night insults into something far more consuming. She has spoken about him in interviews, on stage, and in countless social media posts. Now, according to this latest round, she’s spent serious time and money trying to drag him in front of judges on two continents.
Each attempt has ended the same way.
Legal analysts point out that a dismissal without prejudice leaves the door technically open for another filing. But they also note that four rejections across two legal systems send a pretty clear message. When courts start publicly suggesting the lawyers should feel embarrassed, it’s usually time to rethink the plan.
Supporters of Rosie argue she is simply standing up for what she believes in. Critics say she’s wasting court time on a personal vendetta that long ago stopped being about anything but her own frustration.
Either way, the European judges seem to have spoken for a lot of people when they essentially told her to take a breath and step away.
Rosie’s representatives have stayed silent since the ruling. Her social media accounts, however, rarely stay quiet for long. If past behavior means anything, the next chapter of this saga is probably already being typed out.
For now, though, the scoreboard reads: courts four, Rosie zero. And the rest of the world is laughing along.
