NYC Mayor Adams vs. the far-left City Council: 14 vetoes on bills ‘defying common sense' and counting
Mayor Eric Adams has vetoed 14 City Council bills and other measures in less than four years in office, a move supporters hailed as critical to thwart the Council's radical leftist agenda. Adams' predecessor, avowed Marxist ex-Mayor Bill de Blasio — who enjoyed a good working relationship with his comrades in the Council — never issued a veto during his eight years in office, records show.
'When the City Council pushes unserious or dangerous legislation, it's the mayor's duty to stand up and fight back,' said Councilman Robert Holden, a moderate Queens Democrat who also hailed the mayor for vetoing a series of 'reckless bills.'
Adams' critical vetoes include:
Legislation that would have banned solitary confinement in city jails. Adams battled a Council override in federal court where in July 2024 a federal judge sided with the city and barred the law from being implemented.
a police transparency bill requiring NYPD officers to record all street stops in reports. The Council issued a veto override.
a bill to decriminalize illegal vending. The Council is expected to override the veto later this month, sources said.
A package of four bills that reformed and expanded the Big Apple's housing voucher program. The mayor said the bills would lead to longer shelter stays for New Yorkers and saddle taxpayers with billions of dollars in additional costs. The migrant-welcoming-Council majority issued overrides on each.
Six measures that would have blocked a zoning charge critical to Bally's $4 billion plan to open a Bronx casino on a former golf course owned by President Donald Trump, who Council Speaker Adrienne Adams has accused of being on a 'cruel crusade against immigrant families' for tightening the nation's borders. The measures — which lack enough support to override Adams' veto — were pushed by the local councilmember, GOPer Kristy Marmorato.
4 Mayor Eric Adams has vetoed 14 City Council bills and other measures in less than four years in office, a move supporters hailed as critical to thwart the Council's radical leftist agenda.
Stephen Yang
The mayor's supporters say he's merely exhausting every resource to try blocking lefty measures affecting public-safety and other quality-of-life issues being shoved down New Yorkers' throats.
'The City Council is out of control,' said Councilwoman Vickie Paladino (R-Queens).
4 Adams in January 2024 vetoed the Council's 'How Many Stops Act' bill requiring police to detail in reports even the briefest of encounters with civilians. The Council issued a veto override, driving up overtime costs and taking cops away from solving crimes.
David McGlynn
'I'm glad he's tried to use his veto power to keep the progressives in line, but Adrienne Adams can't find any middle ground on anything and continues to push back on anything in the middle and goes against him on the most common-sense things.'
The Council's sparring with the mayor extends well beyond his vetoes.
4 Adams two weeks ago vetoed a bill to decriminalize illegal vending. The Council is expected to override the veto later this month, sources said.
Christopher Sadowski
Among the political battles are pending legislation Adams opposes that would cost the city $3 billion to remove 300,000 parking spaces near intersections, the budgeting of a free trash bin giveaway, and the legislators' refusal last year to support the mayor's nomination of former federal prosecutor Randy Mastro as corporation counsel.
The former top aide for ex-Mayor Rudy Giulaini was hired months later by Adams as first deputy mayor.
Adams' rocky relationship with the Council can be traced back to late 2021 when he was planning his transition into the mayor's seat and failed to whip enough votes from council members to ensure his hand-picked candidate, Councilman Francisco Moya (D-Queens), would be the next speaker.
And that meant opportunity to the left-dominated Council
'He showed he was an emperor with no clothes by losing his first high-profile fight, so council members realized they could beat him in a fight,' said a former top de Blasio aide.
De Blasio's 'smooth transition' into office in 2014 was partly due to his hand-picked candidate for speaker, Bronx Democrat Melissa Mark-Viverito, winning her speaker race, the source added.
4 Critics says Adams' vetoes and much of his other opposition to the Council far-left agenda is showmanship meant to score votes with voters.
William Farrington
Critics claim the centrist Democratic mayor's vetoes and much of his other opposition to the Council majority's far-left agenda is simply showmanship meant to score votes with voters.
Kayla Mamelak, a mayoral spokeswoman, defended the vetoes, saying the Council has 'passed laws so extreme that they defy commonsense and undermine the goals they were elected to achieve.'
'As a result, Mayor Adams has been compelled to use his veto power to call out the Council's excesses and stand up for working-class, law-abiding New Yorkers who know the difference between commonsense and extremism,' said Mamelak.
'And, now, for the first time in decades, a mayoral veto will not be overridden by the Council — a milestone moment where even many councilmembers realized the Council had gone too far in trying to block the Bally's casino bid and deny the Bronx and the city as a whole the opportunity to compete for thousands of jobs and billions in economic activity.'
Speaker Adams did not return messages.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
10 minutes ago
- Politico
Abbott blasts Crockett, Democrats over redistricting critiques
But in an interview with host Shannon Bream, Abbott dismissed Crockett's concerns. 'The problem that Democrats have in the state of Texas is Hispanics, Black voters and other voters, they have learned now that the ideas that Democrats stand for are contrary to the ideas that the Hispanic community and Black community stand for.' Crockett's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. This weekend is not the first time the two Texans have lobbied insults at each other. Earlier this year, Crockett called Abbott, who uses a wheelchair, 'Governor Hot Wheels' and a 'hot ass mess.' Though she denied she was mocking Abbott's disability, her words drew swift condemnation. Abbott responded by saying Democrats 'have no vision, no policy' and have nothing but hate to offer. The latest remarks come as Republicans in the state rush to follow President Donald Trump's directive for a new congressional map, one that could secure as many as five new congressional seats for the GOP. The directive has drawn backlash from Democrats nationwide, with many arguing the map is designed to silence voters of color. In the first draft of the new map publicly released last month, voters of color in Tarrant County were split among multiple neighboring Republican districts, according to The Texas Tribune. The area is now represented by Democrat Rep. Marc Veasey, who is Black. The shape of the 35th District in Central Texas was also changed, despite being created after a court ordered the state to protect the voting rights of people of color. That district is represented by Democrat Rep. Greg Casar, who is of Mexican descent. Abbott on Sunday said that in the maps the Republican-led legislature is drawing, four of the new seats will be predominantly Hispanic seats. The demographic, he added, 'are now voting for Republicans.'
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
JB Pritzker Responds To Mamdani's No Billionaires Message
Billionaire Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has responded to fellow Democrat and New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani's assertion that billionaires should not exist. 'How much money you have doesn't determine what your values are,' Pritzker said in an interview with NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday. 'I'm a Democrat because I believe that we've got to stand up for our democracy and against the MAGA Republicans who are literally trying to take away people's rights all across this country.' Pritzker has an estimated net worth of $3.7 billion, according to Forbes, in part due to his family's ownership of the Hyatt Hotel chain. The governor's remarks came in response to a statement made by self-proclaimed Democratic-Socialist Mamdani—who won the New York City Democratic primary last month—who said: 'I don't think we should have billionaires.' 'Frankly, it is so much money in a moment of such inequality, and ultimately, what we need more of is equality across our city and across our state and across our country,' he told the same show, Meet the Press, in late June, when he already appeared to have the votes to win the primary. 'And I look forward to working with everyone, including billionaires, to make a city that is fair for all of them,' he added. Both Priztker and Mamdani are seen as rising stars of the Democratic Party, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. Mamdani's victory in the financial capital of the world was seen as a galvanizing moment for the progressive wing of the party and a sign of an insurgent mood among its base. Pritzker, meanwhile, is often spoken of as a potential 2028 presidential contender if the Democrats opt to appeal to moderate voters. Mamdani's concerns are not his alone. Income inequality has been on the rise in the U.S. for decades. The top 1% percent in the U.S. hold more than two-thirds of the nation's wealth, while the least-wealthy 50% of Americans have less than 4%, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Wealth inequality and affordability were major voting factors during the 2024 presidential election, as many voters cited concerns about rising cost-of-living and inflation rates. The 60-year-old Priztker, however, asserted that his politics are shaped by his belief in Americans' right to health care and free public education. Pritzker announced his re-election bid for governor this June.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Goodbye to DEI, crushed by the weight of its own hypocrisies
President Donald Trump's executive orders banning diversity, equity and inclusion-related racial and gender preferencing have ostensibly doomed the DEI industry. But DEI was already on its last legs. Half of all Americans no longer approve of racial, ethnic or gender preferences. Advertisement DEI had enjoyed a surge following the death of George Floyd and the subsequent 120 days of nonstop rioting, arson, assaults, killings and attacks on law enforcement during the summer of 2020. In those chaotic years, DEI was seen as the answer to racial tensions. DEI had insidiously replaced the old notion of affirmative action — a 1960s-era government remedy for historical prejudices against black Americans, from the legacy of slavery to Jim Crow segregation. But during the Obama era, 'diversity' superseded affirmative action by offering preferences to many groups well beyond black Americans. Advertisement Quite abruptly, Americans began talking in Marxist binaries. On one side were the supposed 65 to 70% white majority 'oppressors' and 'victimizers' — often stereotyped as exuding 'white privilege,' 'white supremacy' or even 'white rage.' They were juxtaposed to the 30 to 35% of 'diverse' Americans, the so-called 'oppressed' and 'victimized.' Advertisement Yet almost immediately, contradictions and hypocrisies undermined DEI. First, how does one define 'diverse' in an increasingly multiracial, intermarried, assimilated and integrated society? DNA badges? The old one-drop rule of the antebellum South? Superficial appearance? To establish racial or ethnic proof of being one-sixteenth, one-fourth, or one-half 'non-white,' employers, corporations and universities would have to become racially obsessed genealogists. Advertisement Yet refusing to become racial auditors also would allow racial and ethnic fraudsters — like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the would-be mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani — to go unchecked. Warren falsely claimed Native American heritage to leverage a Harvard professorship. Mamdani, an immigrant son of wealthy Indian immigrants from Uganda, tried to game his way into college by claiming he was African American. Second, in 21st-century America, class became increasingly divergent from race. Mamdani, who promises to tax 'affluent' and 'whiter' neighborhoods at higher rates, is himself the child of Indian immigrants, the most affluent ethnic group in America. Why would the children of Barack Obama, Joy Reid or LeBron James need any special preferences, given the multimillionaire status of their parents? In other words, one's superficial appearance no longer necessarily determines one's income or wealth, nor defines 'privilege' or lack thereof. Third, DEI is often tied to questions of 'reparations.' The current white majority supposedly owes other particular groups financial or entitlement compensation for the sins of the past. Advertisement Yet in today's multiracial and multiethnic society, in which over 50 million residents were not born in the United States and many have only recently arrived, what are the particular historical or past grievances that would earn anyone special treatment? What injustices can recent arrivals from southern Mexico, South Korea or Chad claim, knowing little about, and experiencing no firsthand bias from, Americans, the United States, or its history? Is the DEI logic that when a Guatemalan steps one foot across the southern border, she is suddenly classified as a victim of white oppression and therefore entitled to preferences in hiring or employment? Fourth, does the word 'minority' still carry any currency? Advertisement In today's California, the demography breaks down as 40% Latino, 34% white, 16% Asian American or Pacific Islander, 6% black, and 3% Other — with no significant majority and fewer whites than the Latino 'minority.' Are Latinos the new de facto 'majority' and 'whites' just one of the four other 'minorities?' Do the other minorities, then, have grievances against Latinos, given that they are the dominant population in the state? Fifth, when does DEI 'proportional representation' apply, and when does it not? Are whites 'overrepresented' among the nation's university faculties, reportedly 75% white, when they comprise only about 70% of the population? Advertisement Or, are whites 'underrepresented' as college students, making up just 55% of them, and thus in need of DEI action to bump up their numbers? Black athletes are vastly overrepresented in lucrative and prestigious professional sports. To correct such asymmetries, should Asians and Hispanics be given mandated quotas for quarterback or point-guard positions to ensure proper athletic 'diversity, equity and inclusion'? Sixth, DEI determines good and bad prejudices, as well as correct and incorrect biases. 'Affinity' segregationist graduations — black, Hispanic, Asian and gay — are considered 'affirming'. Advertisement But would a similar affinity graduation ceremony for European-Americans or Jews be considered 'racist'? Is a Latino-themed, de facto segregated house on a California campus considered 'enlightened,' while a European-American dorm would be condemned as incendiary? In truth, DEI long ago became corrupt, falling apart under the weight of its own paradoxes and hypocrisies. It is a perniciously divisive idea — unable to define who qualifies for preference or why, who is overrepresented or not, or when bias is acceptable or unjust. And it is past time that it goes away. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
