On his very first day in office, New York’s new mayor Zohran Mamdani wiped out a swath of executive orders issued by his predecessor — including the city’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism and a directive blocking city agencies from participating in boycotts of Israel. That is not a neutral administrative reset; it is an ideological statement that flips the script on decades of bipartisan consensus about how to confront anti-Jewish hatred and protect a vulnerable community in our city.
Israel’s foreign ministry and leading Jewish organizations slammed the move as reckless and inflammatory, warning that eliminating those safeguards will embolden anti-Israel extremists and chill the safety Jewish New Yorkers rely on from city government. These are not fringe complaints — major communal bodies that represent thousands of families made clear they expect real leadership, not symbolic gestures that strip protections in the name of political posturing.
Mamdani’s office insists the revocations were part of a “clean slate” and that he will continue to fight hate and keep the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism intact. But talk is cheap when the legal and rhetorical tools used to deter and define modern antisemitism are tossed aside on day one; retaining an office without the framework to identify threats is a hollow promise.
Conservatives should be clear-eyed about what this actually does: it legitimizes the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement inside city operations and rewards a political current that has zero interest in Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state. When city hall signals tolerance for singling out America’s greatest Middle East ally for punishment, it sends a dangerous message to the radicals on the street and the ideologues in the institutions who have spent years normalizing anti-Israel rhetoric.
This is not theoretical. In recent years Jewish New Yorkers have been the target of a disproportionate share of hate crimes, and community leaders rightly fear that erasing the IHRA definition and the anti-BDS directives will make enforcement and prevention even harder. Municipal governments have a duty to protect houses of worship and vulnerable neighborhoods, not to give political cover to movements that traffic in demographic and ideological division.
Mamdani’s political history and statements show he is no ordinary progressive — he has long associated with anti-Zionist movements and resisted recognizing Israel’s unique status. That background makes this first-day agenda less like governing and more like an ideological takeover of the mayor’s office, one that could redefine New York’s relationship with an essential ally and with a major portion of its own citizenry.
Patriots and public-spirited conservatives should not meekly accept a mayoral administration that treats safety and solidarity as bargaining chips for political theater. Demand concrete commitments: keep the Office to Combat Antisemitism staffed with professionals who will enforce strong anti-hate standards, clarify that city resources will not be used to promote boycott campaigns, and make plain that Jewish New Yorkers will not be treated as second-class citizens because of ideological experiments.
If city leadership wants unity, it should lead by protecting all New Yorkers equally and unequivocally — not by reversing protections and signaling comfort with movements that single out our allies. New Yorkers must hold their mayor accountable before this “audacious” agenda becomes disastrous for safety, cohesion, and the rule of law.
