President Trump told reporters he was glad to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle return to Britain, but added bluntly that he "was not a fan" and would not have welcomed them back if the decision were his.

Trump made the remarks Wednesday during a question-and-answer session that followed a press conference with travel industry executives. Asked about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's departure from American soil, the president did not hold back. He praised the British royal family, criticized the couple's conduct, and made clear he viewed their six-year stay in the United States as a chapter best closed.

Harry, 41, and Meghan, 45, moved back to the United Kingdom last week after living in California since 2020. The couple gave up their official royal duties years ago and built a new life stateside, one that, the New York Post noted, included failed ventures in book publishing, political influence, Netflix programming, and even jam-making. They arrived in England by private jet with their two children, Archie, 7, and Lilibet, 5.

None of that softened Trump's assessment.

Trump draws a line between the royals and the couple who left them

The president framed his view as a matter of respect, specifically, the respect he believes Harry and Meghan failed to show the Crown. Trump told reporters:

"I thought they treated the royal family with great disrespect. I didn't like it. I didn't like the way she acted. I thought she was terribly disrespectful to the Queen, to King Charles."

He then offered his own verdict on what the royal family should have done.

"If I were the royal family, I would not have taken them back."

That judgment stood in sharp contrast to the reported posture of King Charles III, who is said to be looking forward to spending more time with Harry and Meghan in a personal capacity. The source of that claim was not identified. Whether the couple will resume any official duties remains unclear; they are not expected to receive a "half-in half-out" arrangement, an option the late Queen Elizabeth II firmly rejected years ago.

Trump's warmth toward the royals themselves was unmistakable. He described King Charles as a "great, great guy" and spoke at length about his personal ties to the family.

"I had a very good relationship with the queen, really good. I got to know her very well. A really good relationship with King Charles, I knew him as Prince Charles and King Charles. I've known him for a long time."

A fascination rooted in a Scottish-born mother and a 1953 coronation

Trump has long expressed admiration for the British monarchy, and on Wednesday he traced it to a specific childhood memory. In 1953, he watched Queen Elizabeth II's coronation on television with his mother, Mary Anne Trump, who was born in Scotland. That early impression stuck. In previous public remarks, Trump called Elizabeth a "great woman" who had "really never made a mistake" during her decades on the throne.

The personal connection gives his criticism of Harry and Meghan an edge that goes beyond politics. Trump was not speaking as a head of state weighing a diplomatic matter. He was speaking as someone who reveres the institution the couple walked away from, and who believes they damaged it on the way out.

International departures and returns have been a recurring theme in Trump-era policy, from individuals to entire corporations. International companies have abandoned Cuba under the pressure of Trump sanctions, illustrating how the president's posture shapes who stays and who goes on a global stage.

Open questions follow the Sussexes back to Britain

Harry and Meghan are said to be settling in the Cotswolds area of England for an "extended period," though neither has spoken publicly about their plans. The couple's silence has left several practical questions unanswered, chief among them whether British taxpayers will foot the bill for their security detail now that they are back on U.K. soil.

That question matters. Harry and Meghan left as working royals and return as private citizens. They gave up official duties. They built commercial careers, or tried to. Whether the public should now pay to protect them is a legitimate policy question, and one that British taxpayers deserve a straight answer to.

The satirical side of their return has not gone unnoticed, either. National Review's James Lileks recently explored the theme of Americans relocating abroad and the cultural disruption they bring with them, using a fictional English village as a backdrop to ask a pointed question: "Will they change the culture of their new home?"

Fox News reported Trump's remarks in a similar frame, emphasizing his view that the couple's treatment of the royals was the core issue, not their celebrity ventures or their politics, but their conduct toward the family that gave them their titles.

Trump did not call for any official action. He did not suggest the U.S. government played a role in the couple's departure. He simply said what he thought, in plain language, and moved on.

Sometimes the clearest commentary is the simplest: you don't get to walk away from an institution, spend years publicly undermining it, and then expect a warm welcome when you come back, from anyone.