Latest news with #NewYorkFocus
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Why New York Judges are fighting a major plan to fix court backlogs
— This story first appeared in New York Focus, a non-profit news publication investigating New York state politics. Sign up for their stories at newsletter. New York's justice system has a major problem with backlogs. People languish at Rikers Island and other jails, waiting for their trials. Civil cases drag on for years. Yet a proposed fix is facing fierce opposition from a surprising source — state Supreme Court justices, who routinely witness the consequences borne by the backlogs. In the final days of the Albany legislative session, a constitutional amendment to create an uncapped number of new state Supreme Court justice seats is nearing the finish line. The amendment passed both the Senate and Assembly last year, and if both chambers pass it again before the session's end in June, it will secure a spot on the statewide ballot in 2026, leaving the final decision to voters. The 'Uncap Justice Act' has broad and powerful support. Its backers include Governor Kathy Hochul, Attorney General Letitia James, leaders of the Office of Court Administration, the city and state bar associations, the Business Council, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, and groups representing the rights of criminal defendants. Politically outgunned The opposition comes primarily from several associations representing state Supreme Court judges, which acknowledge they are politically outgunned. Yet some assemblymembers are having second thoughts after listening to counterarguments, according to Frank Caruso, president of the state Association of Justices of the Supreme Court. He called the measure nearing passage 'reckless,' and believes a rival plan is gaining last-minute steam. The fight pits separate but equal branches of government against each other. It also puts part of upstate at odds with New York City, especially Manhattan, which the amendment's two main sponsors — State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal and Assemblymember Alex Bores — represent. To win election, state Supreme Court judges must first be nominated to appear on the ballot by political party insiders, a process that has been criticized for inherent conflicts of interest. After nomination, candidates appear on the general election ballot in one of New York's 13 judicial districts, and if successful, win 14-year terms. The proposed amendment would make a simple change in the state constitution by removing language that limits each of New York's 13 judicial districts to one Supreme Court justice per 50,000 people. The status quo is based on language adopted in 1846 and last modified in 1963, when, according to Bores, caseloads were a third of today's. According to Bores, three districts have hit their cap and couldn't add another justice without a huge spike in population: Manhattan, the Bronx, and the Capital Region. 'The dumbest reason why we are so backlogged is that we don't have enough judges,' Bores told New York Focus. 'There is no similar limit in the federal constitution. There is no similar limit in 49 states.' New York has 11 trial courts, and ten of them have no such limit. The exception is the Supreme Court, which can hear a wide range of both criminal and civil cases. If the amendment passed, the legislature could place new Supreme Court judges anywhere in the state. Each new judgeship costs the state roughly $1 million annually, according to Bores. Manhattan shoulders a disproportionate share of litigation, driven by its daily influx of millions of commuters, more than 50 million annual tourists, and concentration of foreign, federal, state and local government institutions, according to the nonprofit Fund for Modern Courts. Its role as a global financial hub also makes it a key venue for complex business disputes. 'An average Manhattan Supreme Court Justice walks into their office every day with 2,500 cases on their docket and 400 motions awaiting their decision,' said Assemblymember Eddie Gibbs, who represents a portion of Manhattan. There was a distinct Manhattan presence at an Albany press conference last week in support of the proposed amendment, including assemblymembers, a group representing public defenders, and the executive director of the county Democratic Party. There were also assemblymembers from Brooklyn, Westchester, and Albany. Though case backlogs have grown across the state since the onset of Covid-19, the largest spike occurred in New York City. Between 2019 and 2024, the number of unresolved cases across New York City courts jumped by 34 percent, according to data from the Office of Court Administration. Pending cases elsewhere in the state increased by 9 percent. The constitutional limit on Supreme Court justices filters down to the other trial courts. According to the New York City Bar Association, there were 364 elected Supreme Court justices in 2022. In addition, 317 more judges had been 'reassigned' by the state Office of Court Administration to serve as 'acting' Supreme Court justices from other courts. This maneuver to circumvent the constitutional limit takes away resources from lower courts and forces litigants to appear before judges whom they'll never be able to vote for or against. 'This 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' approach stretches our judicial resources thin,' said Muhammad Faridi, president of the New York City Bar Association. 'It depletes critical resources from other courts that need them the most. It undercuts the right of voters to elect Supreme Court justices.' Caruso, president of the state Association of Justices of the Supreme Court, said he agreed that the state needs to expand the number of Supreme Court justices and end the system's unacceptable delays. But he said the Bores proposal threatened to 'undermine the separation of powers' by injecting a political branch of government — the legislature — into the judiciary. 'Our concern is any type of 'horse-trading,' where judges would be sent — or a seat would be sent — from one end of the state to the other,' he said. The legislature currently has unfettered discretion to create other types of trial court judgeships, and allegations of politicization have arisen in the past. For instance, in an effort to address case backlogs, the Democratic-controlled legislature added 12 civil court judgeships in New York City last year. The four Democrat-heavy boroughs received three new judges each, while none went to Republican-heavy Staten Island. While Staten Island Republicans slammed the move, Hoylman-Sigal told the New York Post that judges could be transferred from other boroughs to Staten Island if necessary. But those judges wouldn't have been elected by more conservative Staten Island voters. Caruso, who is a state Supreme Court justice in Niagara County, expressed concern that 'districts west of Albany would suffer' if the distribution of judgeships were in the hands of a legislature dominated by downstate lawmakers. 'I don't think the focus would be on us and our districts, our constitutional guarantee,' he said. He acknowledged the severity of backlogs in New York City, but argued that you 'don't want to throw the rest of the state under the bus in order to deal with those backlogs.' Caruso's statewide advocacy group opposes the proposed amendment, as does an association representing New York City's Supreme Court justices. Yet there is a split within the five boroughs, with Manhattan's Supreme Court justices supporting the amendment. A group representing 'acting' Supreme Court justices also backs the Uncap Justice Act. Bores has introduced a companion bill that would require the state's chief administrative judge to make annual recommendations to the legislature concerning the number of judges needed in each court. This chief administrative judge would take population into account, as well as other factors, such as the number of cases filed and their complexity. Ultimately, Bores's bill would leave decisions about adding judgeships in the hands of the legislature. This companion bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday but hasn't moved through committee in the Assembly. According to Bores, both Chief Judge Rowan Wilson and Chief Administrative Judge Joseph Zayas support the proposed constitutional amendment. But Caruso believes that removing the cap would place too much power in their Office of Court Administration, which could exert influence upon the legislature's decisions about where to create judgeships. While Supreme Court justices generally have a favorable view of Wilson, he won't be chief judge forever, Caruso noted. and in the future, 'you could wind up with a dictatorial person that won't listen to anything.' Instead, Caruso's organization supports a rival proposed constitutional amendment sponsored by Assemblymember Jeffrey Dinowitz of the Bronx and state Senator Leroy Comrie of Queens. This proposal would retain a population cap in the constitution but allow a justice for every 30,000 people per judicial district, rather than the current cap of 50,000. According to Caruso, this would allow the legislature to create up to 266 additional Supreme Court judgeships while still providing 'guardrails for each district.' Dinowitz told New York Focus that he tried to come up with a proposal where 'every place around the state could more easily benefit.' 'Some of the backlogs were exacerbated as a result of the pandemic, and so some of that is starting to ease a bit. But nonetheless, there is a need,' Dinowitz said. 'I do think that lowering it to 30,000 will address the problem for the indefinite future.' 'My concern with the other bill — and I'm not saying it's a horrible bill, because it's not — is that everything would go to one place, like Manhattan,' Dinowitz said. 'The way I've proposed it, I think it will guarantee some fairness.' For a proposed constitutional amendment to go onto the ballot, a measure must pass in two separately elected legislatures. Elections are held every two years, with the next one coming November 2026. So even if the Dinowitz proposal were passed this year or next, it still would require passage again in 2027 or 2028 to go on the ballot. Because the Uncap Justice Act passed the legislature last year — before 2024 elections — it could pass either this session or next year and still be on the ballot in November 2026. But Bores is pushing for passage this year and is close: The proposed constitutional amendment is poised to be voted on by the full Senate, though it still hasn't passed through the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Caruso said that last year, the legislature moved so quickly to pass the Uncap Justice Act that his group didn't get a chance to 'lobby the way we wanted to. It kind of came out of nowhere, without any discussion with us.' While his group still faces an uphill battle, Caruso said that some assemblymembers jumped behind the Uncap Justice Act without hearing counterarguments and have now reconsidered. 'There were some Assembly people that initially supported the Bores bill that, when we talked to them, they said, 'Oh, geez, we didn't realize that,'' he said. 'So now, they switched to the Dinowitz bill.' The association did lobby the legislature last year, according to Bores. Since then, the Assembly cosponsors have only grown, from 52 to 73. Two members took their names off after being lobbied by the association, but after speaking to Bores, have returned, he said. The Dinowitz bill currently has seven Assembly cosponsors. Ultimately, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie will decide which bill, if any, moves to the Assembly floor for a vote. Facing the rival proposal, Bores believes Uncap Justice is the only proposed means of permanently addressing the crushing backlog. The constitutional language 'was last changed in the 1960s,' Bores said. 'When it's changed the next time, none of us who are in this conversation will be part of it. So do we want to pass this problem on? Or do we just want to solve it?'
The Intercept
30-05-2025
- Politics
- The Intercept
How Student Protesters and Immigrants Became Targets of Trump's Surveillance Tech
'Catch and revoke' — the phrase sounds like something from a dystopian thriller, but it's Secretary of State Marco Rubio's very real characterization of the Trump administration's new one-strike visa cancellation policy targeting foreign students. A State Department spokesperson said that 'full social media vetting' will be used for visa interviews and will be ongoing while the student remains in the U.S. for studies. On this week's episode of The Intercept Briefing, host Akela Lacy speaks to anthropologist Sophia Goodfriend and Chris Gelardi, a reporter for New York Focus investigating surveillance and the criminal legal system. They unpack how AI and surveillance technology are being weaponized to silence dissent on American campuses and fuel the deportations of immigrants nationwide. 'In the past few months, as we see the expansion of government surveillance, the crackdown of ICE on both legal residents and undocumented people in this country, we see these technologies lending a veneer of algorithmic efficiency to increasingly draconian policies,' says Goodfriend. The effort is powered by more companies than most people realize. 'To enforce all of that and to bolster those efforts are a host of different kinds of both small AI startups, of data brokers, of large tech conglomerates like Meta, OpenAI, Palantir, and the like. So it is really this kind of enormous dragnet of surveillance that's bolstered by the tech industry that's increasingly aligned with the Trump administration,' she says. But this surveillance machine extends well beyond university campuses. The same technologies are being deployed against immigrant communities across the country. This means every digital footprint becomes potential evidence for deportation proceedings. Social media posts, location data, facial recognition from community events, and even routine traffic stops feed into massive databases. Gelardi explains that one of the more concerning sources of information comes from state police gang databases, which are rife with mistakes. 'I think all evidence suggests that these are very under-regulated and that they operate in a way where they're really ripe for garbage data and inaccuracies,' he says. He cites some gang databases that had children under 5 listed. Gelardi explains that local law enforcement enters names into state databases that feed to the national crime information center run by the FBI. Law enforcement at all levels — local, state, and federal — can access it on their phones. 'Anything that the state police funnels to the feds is immediately available to pretty much any ICE agent,' he says. To understand more about the tech infrastructure powering deportations and what this digital crackdown means for everyone, listen to the full conversation of The Intercept Briefing on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Upstate orchard putting new farmworker protections to the test
Earlier this month, about a dozen workers arrived in Wolcott, a small town halfway between Rochester and Syracuse, to grow apple trees. At this time of year, farmworkers are grafting and budding, and planting long rows of seedlings. They traveled to Wafler Farms, an apple orchard and fruit tree nursery, from Jamaica. Some have been making the journey for many years, living on the farm for up to three seasons and earning money to support their wives and send their children to school back home. It's a precarious arrangement: They can only return to the farm, and therefore to the US, if their boss brings them back. 'Sometimes you have to see something being done wrong and shut your mouth — you can't say nothing. Because if you say something, you just might not come back next year,' said Christopher, a seasonal worker who has been returning to the farm for a decade. (Four Wafler Farms workers spoke with New York Focus and asked to have their names changed to protect them from retaliation.) Things were supposed to be different this year. A long-awaited union contract took effect in April, granting workers benefits including higher pay and the right to return each year if there is work for them. So far, the contract is not being followed, according to the farmworkers. Wafler Farms never agreed to the contract. The family-run farm refused to bargain with the union, which was formed in 2022 by a majority of the approximately 90 people working there during the peak of the harvest, and is affiliated with the United Farm Workers of America, a national labor union. So negotiations were moved to an independent arbitration process, as stipulated by state law. Wafler declined to participate in that process, as well, and a contract was finalized without the employer's input. It's among the first few union contracts that farmworkers have won in New York since 2019, when the state legislature granted them collective bargaining rights as part of a package of landmark protections for agricultural workers. They are excluded from unionizing under federal law — a legacy of New Deal-era politics. The fruit farm is now a testing ground for what workers can achieve under New York's law, and how far the state will go to help them. Wafler Farms is arguing in a Wayne County Supreme Court case that the union is not legitimate, on the basis that the farm owner did not have the chance to discourage it from forming and that employees on guest worker visas do not have the right to unionize. (A handful of farms and the New York State Vegetable Growers Association brought a lawsuit making a similar argument in October 2023, but the court upheld the right of guestworkers to organize, and the case is now being appealed.) Wafler has sought to halt contract negotiations while the case proceeds, but has so far failed to do so. Wafler Farms and its attorney did not respond to requests for comment. On April 30, the union filed a charge against Wafler Farms with the state Public Employment Relations Board for failing to follow the contract. The labor board, set up to resolve disputes for state public workers, is tasked with enforcing the farmworker union law. The charge is awaiting a hearing at the board. If it rules against the farm, it may still be up to the union to enforce the contract. 'We would prefer that PERB would say, 'Hey, we issued this order and the company is refusing to abide by it, we're going to take them to court,'' said Armando Elenes, secretary treasurer of the United Farm Workers. But Elenes isn't optimistic that the board will be that aggressive. 'We are testing the law in real time,' he said. New York's more than 50,000 farmworkers had long been excluded from many of the labor protections that other workers in the state enjoy. They didn't get overtime pay, benefits like disability and family leave, or the right to unionize. Then, in 2019, the legislature passed the Farm Laborers Fair Labor Practices Act, ending those exclusions. The law guarantees farmworkers a day of rest each week. It grants them overtime pay after 56 hours of work in a week (unlike the 40 hour threshold for other workers). and it gives them the right to unionize, although they can't legally go on strike, limiting their power to extract concessions. Since then, workers on fifteen farms in New York have formed unions. Eight have formed with the United Farm Workers, the union best known for its 20th century boycotts and worker organizing in California. The UFW has struggled in recent decades to retain members and win contracts, and labor experts have hailed its recent organizing successes in New York as a potential turning point. 'It's really hard to organize folks in rural areas, because folks are really isolated,' said Reverend Richard Witt, executive director of the Rural & Migrant Ministry, a New York organization that helped pass the 2019 reforms. 'And then you add into that the power dynamics, and economic dynamics … within agriculture, it makes it really, really hard to organize.' The United Farm Workers and two other unions — the United Food and Commercial Workers and the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union — have been organizing workers across the state, including on apple orchards, a dairy farm, and Long Island vineyards. Many of those workers are immigrants, often undocumented, or migrants who come to the US for a portion of the year through a guest worker program called H-2A. That program allows employers to hire temporary workers from other countries and requires them to provide housing and pay a minimum wage on par with the industry's wages in the region. More than 10,000 workers were approved for the visas in New York last year. At Wafler Farms, nearly all of the workers are Jamaicans on H-2A visas. They say the work offers a pathway to a better life. 'The wages here are a lot better than what we get in Jamaica,' said Christopher, who has a wife and two children back home. 'To send your family to a good college, to live a standard life, it's difficult in Jamaica. A regular nine to five cannot do it.' One of the workers works as a DJ during his months in Jamaica, another as a tour guide, a third in construction. While the money supports their families, the farm work comes with challenges. 'For a lot of guys, your relationship gets ruined because of leaving your family for so long,' said George, another worker. 'We take the chance because we want betterment for our family.' The H-2A program does not provide a path to citizenship, and workers are excluded from the Social Security system. Their presence in the US is contingent on their employer, meaning they can't seek out better pay and conditions by switching jobs, and they risk losing their livelihoods if they aren't rehired. 'You just don't know if you're coming back until they call you,' said Christopher. 'You could be in Jamaica, you don't have a primary job that you can depend on, you're depending on this job that you have now.' In 2022, workers at Wafler decided to unionize with United Farm Workers. They hoped that a union would protect their jobs, even when they spoke up about working conditions. They also hoped it would stop the verbal abuse they faced from their boss. A video taken by one of the workers that year shows the owner screaming and repeatedly swearing at a group of them. 'Everybody was tired of this type of situation where if you see something wrong, and you try to talk about it, there is a backlash coming,' said Christopher. The United Farm Workers has charged that some workers were called back later than usual last year in retaliation for union organizing. Those charges are awaiting a decision by the state labor board. At Wafler and on other farms, the union efforts have been 'extremely contentious,' said Richard Stup, the director of the Agricultural Workforce Development Program at Cornell University. 'When you have a closely-held business like a farm, where people have been personally invested in it sometimes for generations, the idea of a union coming in and lodging itself in the middle of your business is almost inconceivable.' Farm owner Paul Wafler 'was really pissed when he found out' about the union, Chistopher said. 'He was like, 'You stabbed me in the back.'' A couple of miles down the road from Wafler Farms, workers at Cahoon Farms, which grows apples and cherries, also organized with the United Farm Workers and won the union's first contract in New York. Management at Cahoons Farm agreed to follow it. The Wafler contract is the first in the state to be imposed through arbitration. Under the 2019 law, if the union and employer can't reach a contract through bargaining, the matter can be brought to an arbitrator selected by both sides. Since the unions aren't allowed to strike, the process is meant to ensure that employers can't indefinitely delay negotiations. The Wafler Farms contract includes the recall rights that the workers had sought: they will be brought back every year in order of seniority. They'll get a small wage increase for the two years of the contract, paid holidays and vacation, and some employer matching for a retirement plan. But right now, that contract isn't being followed, the union charges. The workers are not being paid the more-than-$19 hourly wage stipulated by the contract, and the owner has changed their working conditions without negotiating with the union. Under the 2019 reforms, farmworker unions are under the purview of the Public Employment Relations Board, which oversees New York public sector unions as well as private sector workers who can't unionize under federal law, like at horse racing tracks and religious organizations. The board has the power to certify unions, oversee the bargaining process, and rule on charges of unfair labor practices. Employers who violate the law face fines of up to $5,000 and up to a year in prison. The board can also petition the state Supreme Court to enforce the law. (No unfair labor practice charges in agricultural workplaces have yet reached that point.) 'PERB is used to dealing with public employers, which operate in a much different manner than not only private employers, but agricultural private employers,' said Elenes of the United Farm Workers. 'I think they're having a wake up call that this is a different animal — this is agriculture.' The union's charge against the farm for violating the contract is awaiting a hearing at the board. The union is seeking back pay for the workers, among other remedies. 'Our goal is the prompt resolution of certification and ULP matters and helping the parties build a healthy and productive collective bargaining relationship,' board chairperson Timothy Connick told New York Focus in a statement. Even without the contract being followed, some things have changed since the workers unionized. For one, they now get paid for orientation. And the swearing has abated. 'They talk to us much different,' said George. 'There's a lot of respect now,' said Christopher.
News18
28-05-2025
- Politics
- News18
Mira Nair's Son Zohran Mamdani, Running For NY Mayor Post, Under Fire For Attacking PM Modi
Last Updated: When asked if he would meet Modi if the Indian PM held a rally in New York and asked for a joint press conference, Mamdani said he wouldn't attend such an event New York City mayoral candidate and Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani, the son of filmmaker Mira Nair, sparked outrage among Indo-American leaders and community representatives for spreading hate against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 33-year-old made the remarks at an event, 'New Mayor, New Media', held on May 15 (local time) by New York Focus. WHAT MAMDANI SAID? When asked if he would meet Modi if the Indian PM held a rally in New York and asked for a joint press conference, Mamdani said he wouldn't attend such an event, equating Modi to Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu and calling him a 'war criminal", according to the New York Post. He then went on to blame the PM for the 2002 Gujarat riots, saying people were 'shocked" when he revealed he was a Gujarati Muslim. The Supreme Court in 2022 upheld the Special Investigation Team's (SIT) clean chit to then Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and 63 others in the 2002 riots in the state. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in an interview with US-based podcaster and AI researcher Lex Fridman, earlier this year, called Godhra train incident a tragedy of ' unimaginable magnitude" which became a 'sparking point for violence". 'But that one tragic incident in 2002 became a sparking point, leading some people towards violence. Yet, the judiciary thoroughly investigated the matter. At that time, our political opponents were in power, and naturally they wanted all allegations against us to stick. Despite their relentless efforts, the judiciary analysed the situation meticulously twice and ultimately found us completely innocent. Those who were truly responsible have faced justice from the courts," he said. MAMDANI'S INDIAN CONNECTION Zohran Mamdani, the son of Indian-American Mira Nair, was born and raised in Kampala, Uganda, before moving to New York City at the age of seven. His father, Mahmood Mamdani, a Ugandan, has roots in Gujarat. Nair's films include Monsoon Wedding, Mississippi Masala, Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love, and The Reluctant Fundamentalist. My mother brought me into this world, helped me understand it, and taught me 'if we don't tell our own stories, no one else will." I love you, my dear Mother's Day to my Mama, and to mothers everywhere! — Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@ZohranKMamdani) May 11, 2025 'HIGHLY OBJECTIONABLE FOR HINDUS': NOT THE FIRST TIME Mamdani is known for criticising New York politicians of Indian descent — Queens Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar and former state Sen. Kevin Thomas — for not condemning Modi. In 2020, he said on X: '@JeniferRajkumar should return the money she's taken from Hindu fascists." Rajkumar had then called Mamdani's comments 'extreme and divisive," and urged voters to 'reject hate, whether from the far left or far right." 'Hinduism is a faith of peace, nonviolence, and interfaith harmony. Hindu voters want our leaders to build bridges—not burn them. We must reject hate—whether it comes from the far left or the far right. Our city deserves leaders who unite, not provoke—who build coalitions, not headlines," she said. A central tenet of Hinduism is inclusivity and mutual respect toward people of all faiths. Hindus believe not just in tolerance, but in one step more than tolerance– actively loving and respecting people of different backgrounds and faiths.— Jenifer Rajkumar (@JeniferRajkumar) August 8, 2022 Mamdani has also said on X: '@KevinThomasNY should acknowledge the terrifying truth of what's happening to Muslim Indians." He also said former Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney should 'renounce her association with Modi & condemn the atrocities he's perpetrated." Jaspreet Singh, a Sikh Community Leader and human rights lawyer, said, 'Hate has no place in our city. We believe in equality, love and respect for all. We believe all are children of the same God. But Zohran has used his platform to amplify some of the worst anti-Hindu rhetoric imaginable. Words matter, and instead of uniting the Indian community, he seeks to divide us by religion, pitting Muslims and Hindus against each other. Associating Hindus with fascism and using derogatory words against them is highly objectionable." OBAMA TO FIREFIGHTERS: CONTROVERSY'S CHILD top videos View all Mamdani also reportedly trashed Barack Obama, accusing the former US president of lying, in a series of tweets from 2013 which resurfaced recently. Mamdani, who is polling second behind ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, repeatedly refused to sign off an annual, non-controversial resolution simply commemorating May 4 as 'Volunteer Firefighters Day'. Mamdani was also one of the few Assembly Democrats to vote against a bill eventually signed into law creating a task force to help with recruitment and retention of volunteer firefighters in New York. In 2023, he also voted against providing $25 million to volunteer fire departments statewide for new equipment and facilities and another $10 million to provide stipends to volunteer firefighters for offset training costs. Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from geopolitics to diplomacy and global trends. Stay informed with the latest world news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : Narendra Modi news18 specials Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: May 28, 2025, 12:41 IST News world Mira Nair's Son Zohran Mamdani, Running For NY Mayor Post, Under Fire For Attacking PM Modi
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Socialist NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani ripped for spreading ‘hate' after calling India leader Narendra Modi ‘war criminal'
Socialist New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani denounced India Prime Minister Narendra Modi a 'war criminal' — and is now being ripped by other city leaders for spreading 'hate' about the Hindu head of state. On the heels of making similarly provocative comments about Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mamdani blasted Modi during a recent mayoral forum. 'This is someone we should view in the same manner we do Benjamin Netenyahu. This is a war criminal,' Mamdani said when asked a hypothetical question about whether he would meet Modi if the Indian leader visited the Big Apple. Mamdani, who is a Muslim of Indian descent, noted that his father Mahmood's family hails from the Gujarat region of India, where Modi has been accused of allowing a massacre of 1,000 Muslims to go on in 2002. It's a claim Modi has repeatedly denied. 'Narendra Modi helped to orchestrate what was a mass slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat to the extent that [people] don't even believe there are Gujarat Muslims anymore,' Mamdani said during the May 15 'New Mayor, New Media' event sponsored by New York Focus and HellGate NY. He also said people are 'shocked' when he reveals he's a Gujarat Muslim. He previously slammed two New York politicians of Indian descent — Queens Assemblywoman Jenifer Rajkumar and former state Sen. Kevin Thomas — for being aligned with or not condemning Modi and his ruling Hindu government. In 2020, he criticized other lawmakers of Indian descent for associating with Modi's regime. '@JeniferRajkumar should return the money she's taken from Hindu fascists,' he said in a tweet, referring to the Queens assemblywoman who is now running for public advocate. '@KevinThomasNY should acknowledge the terrifying truth of what's happening to Muslim Indians,' he added, referring to the former Long Island state senator. He also said former Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney should 'renounce her association with Modi & condemn the atrocities he's perpetrated.' In response, Rajkumar, an Indo-American who is Hindu, took a swipe at Mamdani. 'At a time when New Yorkers are struggling with real issues—rising crime, a housing crisis, and growing hate—we cannot afford to be distracted by extreme, divisive language about foreign leaders,' Rajkumar said. 'Hinduism is a faith of peace, nonviolence, and interfaith harmony. Hindu voters want our leaders to build bridges—not burn them. We must reject hate—whether it comes from the far left or the far right. Our city deserves leaders who unite, not provoke—who build coalitions, not headlines,' the lawmaker said in a swipe at Mamdani. Jaspreet Singh, a Sikh Community Leader and human rights lawyer, said, 'Hate has no place in our city. We believe in equality, love and respect for all. We believe all are children of the same God. 'But Zohran has used his platform to amplify some of the worst anti-Hindu rhetoric imaginable. Words matter, and instead of uniting the Indian community, he seeks to divide us by religion, pitting Muslims and Hindus against each other. Associating Hindus with fascism and using derogatory words against them is highly objectionable.' Singh accused Mamdani of trying to 'dehumanize' the Hindu community. 'Hatred serves no purpose. People who wish to serve others in any capacity should rise above it. He owes the Hindu community an apology and if he cares about human rights, he'll start treating us as equals. This type of hateful rhetoric against our community has no place in New York, let alone anywhere near the footsteps of City Hall.' Mamdani's criticism could stir up the 250,000 Indo-Americans, many of whom are Hindus. It wouldn't be the only large New York voting block that his comments and actions have incensed. Mamdani is also a staunch critic of Israel and supports the boycott divestment and sanctions movement against the Jewish State, even leading 'BDS!' chants at a 2021 pro-Palestinian rally. Jewish civil rights groups such as the Anti-Defamation brand the BDS movement as antisemitic for seeking to undermine Israel.
