As a Mamdani Victory Looms, Anti-Muslim Attacks Roll In From the Right
Even before Zohran Mamdani claimed victory in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary, he had become a target of racist attacks from the far right. Those attacks have only intensified in the wake of his commanding performance on Tuesday, with Republican elected officials and right-wing media figures accusing him of promoting Islamic law, supporting terrorism and posing a threat to the safety of New Yorkers, especially Jews.
There has been nothing subtle about it: Stephen Miller, the architect of the Trump administration's immigration policy, called Mr. Mamdani's apparent win 'the clearest warning yet of what happens to a society when it fails to control migration.' Representative Andy Ogles, Republican of Tennessee, accused Mr. Mamdani of supporting terrorists and asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to strip him of his citizenship and deport him.
Representative Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, shared a photo of Mr. Mamdani preparing for an Eid service while dressed in a kurta, writing, 'we sadly have forgotten' the Sept. 11 attacks, which occurred when Mr. Mamdani was 9 years old and living in Manhattan. And Charlie Kirk, the head of Turning Point USA, a leading group for conservative youth, sought to connect him to those attacks even more directly.
'24 years ago a group of Muslims killed 2,753 people on 9/11,' he wrote. 'Now a Muslim Socialist is on pace to run New York City.'
The attacks on Mr. Mamdani, who would be the first Muslim mayor of New York City if elected, deal in well-worn Islamophobic and anti-immigrant tropes. To some, they carry echoes of the 'birther' conspiracy theory Donald J. Trump stoked for years before he was elected president, when he falsely claimed that President Barack Obama was Muslim and born in Kenya.
Mr. Obama is Christian and was born in Hawaii; Mr. Mamdani is Muslim and was born to Indian parents in Uganda. But like the 'birther' attacks, the vitriolic barbs being aimed at Mr. Mamdani seek to paint him as a shadowy, dangerous figure who bears no resemblance to the candidate himself.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
29 minutes ago
- CNN
Courtney B. Vance on book bans, protests in Los Angeles, and narrating the audiobook of the biography of W.E.B. Du Bois
Laura sits down with award-winning actor Courtney B. Vance to talk about his latest role narrating the new audiobook of "W.E.B. Du Bois: Biography of a Race". Vance also discusses the rise of book bans and the deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles.
CNN
30 minutes ago
- CNN
Courtney B. Vance on book bans, protests in Los Angeles, and narrating the audiobook of the biography of W.E.B. Du Bois
Laura sits down with award-winning actor Courtney B. Vance to talk about his latest role narrating the new audiobook of "W.E.B. Du Bois: Biography of a Race". Vance also discusses the rise of book bans and the deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles.
New York Times
31 minutes ago
- New York Times
House Panel Subpoenas Harvard in Tuition-Pricing Inquiry
The House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Harvard on Thursday in its investigation into whether Ivy League universities have coordinated their pricing, turning up pressure on a school already in an all-out battle with the Trump administration. In the subpoena letter, Representatives Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Scott Fitzgerald, a Wisconsin Republican who leads a key subcommittee, demanded documents and communications about the university's tuition and financial aid by July 17. They said they were issuing the subpoena after Harvard's response to an earlier request for information was 'inadequate' and 'substantively deficient,' with much of the material that was turned over already publicly available. Harvard disputed the committee's assessment. 'We are disappointed that the committee has chosen to issue a subpoena and believe it is unwarranted, unfair and unnecessary,' said Jason Newton, a Harvard spokesman. He added that the university 'has produced thousands of pages of documents regarding our tuition setting process and financial aid program.' The subpoena threatened to break open yet another front in what has become a sprawling legal battle between Harvard and Republicans in Washington. The Trump administration has sought to punish the university for not acceding to its demands as President Trump pushes to shift the ideological tilt of the higher education system. The university has been the target of investigations from at least six federal agencies, and the administration has already tried to cut off billions of dollars in federal funding and block international students from attending Harvard, among other measures. Courts have halted many of the Trump administration's actions, and the university has become a symbol of resistance for not bowing to Mr. Trump. But Harvard officials have concluded their legal victories alone may not be enough to protect the university and are debating whether they might be able to reach a deal with the administration. The House Judiciary Committee had originally sought information in a letter to Harvard on April 8, alleging that Ivy League schools were 'collectively raising tuition prices' in breach of antitrust laws and were 'engaging in perfect price discrimination by offering selective financial aid packages to maximize profits.' They requested a large swath of documents between Harvard, other Ivy League schools and the College Board that contained any communication related to tuition, financial aid and admission practices. As part of the request, the committee asked for any documents related to the 568 Presidents Group, a collection of universities that worked to provide similar tuition prices and financial aid. The organization was dissolved in 2022 amid a class-action lawsuit. Harvard was not involved in the group or in the lawsuit. In an attempt to address its high tuition, Harvard announced in March that students whose families earned less than $100,000 could attend the school for free, while those whose families earn less than $200,000 would not have to pay the cost of tuition.
