Mamdani says he wouldn't use ‘globalize the intifada' term: Reports
Mamdani, a state Assembly member who pulled off an upset victory to win the Democratic primary for mayor, has received significant criticism over the past month for comments he made during an interview in which he avoided condemning the phrase that has been a lightning rod throughout much of the Israel-Hamas war.
In June, he said the phrase can have different meanings to different people, and he hears from the phrase a 'desperate desire for equality and equal rights in standing up for Palestinian human rights.' He has also said he wouldn't use the term itself, and no instances have come to light of Mamdani using it.
But three people familiar with Mamdani's comments in front of a group of business leaders on Tuesday told The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal that he said he wouldn't use it and doesn't believe others should use it either. The outlet reported the meeting included 150 executives at a closed-door event hosted by the Partnership for New York, a group of members representing banks, law firms and corporations.
The phrase has received widespread attention since Hamas's Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel that killed nearly 1,200 people. Pro-Palestinian activists have maintained the phrase only refers to liberation for Palestinians to have the right to their own state and doesn't endorse calls for violence.
Meanwhile, pro-Israel supporters and many Jews recall the first and second intifadas that took place in Israel in the 1980s and 2000s in which Palestinians engaged in protests against Israeli occupation. Some were peaceful while others weren't, and many people died on both sides.
Mamdani told those in attendance on Tuesday that some see the term as expressing solidarity with Palestinians, but others view it as calling for violence against Israel, the Times reported.
The Hill has reached out to Mamdani's campaign for comment.
Mamdani's comments come as he tries to coalesce support as the Democratic nominee. He hasn't yet received endorsements from top New York Democrats, like House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. All of them have been critical of Mamdani's defense of the term and called for him to reassure Jewish New Yorkers that he will represent them too.
Mamdani is taking part in a breakfast on Wednesday in Washington with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and is expected to meet with Jeffries this week.
The Democratic nominee is facing a multi-candidate field in the general election, including former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, whom he defeated in the primary. Cuomo announced Monday that he is running as an independent, alongside Mayor Eric Adams who's also running as an independent, Republican Curtis Sliwa and independent Jim Walden.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump administration's lawsuit over Chicago's sanctuary city policies tossed by federal judge
A federal judge on Friday dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit challenging sanctuary city policies in Chicago and the state of Illinois. The Justice Department sued Illinois, Cook County and the city of Chicago — along with several state and local officials, including Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker and Mayor Brandon Johnson — in February, arguing their sanctuary laws 'interfere' with Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) ability to arrest and deport illegal migrants. District Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, concluded that sanctuary policies — which prohibit local law enforcement from cooperating with federal authorities on immigration enforcement — are protected by the 10th Amendment. 6 Federal agents detain a protester attempting to block US ICE agents from entering a building housing an immigration court in Chicago, Ill. on June 16, 2025. REUTERS '[T]he Sanctuary Policies reflect Defendants' decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law — a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by [federal immigration laws],' Jenkins wrote in her 64-page ruling. 'Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment,' the judge continued. 'It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity — the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.' Jenkins also determined that the Trump administration lacked standing to sue the 'individual defendants' named in the case, such as Pritzker and Cook. She dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, meaning the Trump administration may amend its complaint if it wishes to continue litigating the issue. In their lawsuit, the Trump administration singled out the Illinois Trust Act and Chicago's Welcoming City ordinance. 6 President Donald Trump speaks to reporters outside the White House on July 25, 2025. Ron Sachs/CNP / The Trust Act declares that 'State law does not currently grant State or local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' while the Welcoming City ordinance emphatically states, 'No agency or agent shall: arrest, detain or continue to detain a person solely on the belief that the person is not present legally in the United States.' Pritzker and Johnson celebrated the judge's ruling. 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court,' the governor wrote on X. 'Their case challenging the bipartisan TRUST Act was dismissed — unlike the President, we follow the law and listen to the courts.' 6 Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker speaks after a meeting in the governor's office in Chicago on April 7, 2023. Getty Images Meanwhile, Johnson tweeted that the ruling 'affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety.' 'Chicago cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,' the mayor added. 'Our city is safer when local law enforcement can focus on the needs of Chicagoans.' 6 Lindsay C. Jenkins, US district judge for the Northern District of Illinois nominee, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill on Oct. 12, 2022. REUTERS 6 Protesters hold up a sign opposing President Trump outside Trump Tower in Chicago during a rally on Jan. 20, 2025. AP The ruling is a setback to the Trump administration, which earlier this week sued New York City and Mayor Eric Adams over Gotham's sanctuary city policies — similarly arguing that rules limiting the NYPD's and other law enforcement agencies' cooperation with federal immigration enforcement are unconstitutional. The move came after two illegal migrants allegedly shot an off-duty Customs and Border Protection officer in the face in a Manhattan park. Attorney General Pam Bondi filed suit against Chicago and the state of Illinois on her first day on the job at DOJ. 6 Federal agents hold back a protester during an ICE exercise outside an immigration court in Chicago on June 16, 2025. REUTERS Bondi teased that the lawsuit would be the first of several going after sanctuary policies in Democrat-run states and cities. 'If you are a leader of a state or local jurisdiction that obstructs or impedes federal law enforcement, you will be next,' Bondi said in February. The DOJ has since filed lawsuits against New York City, Los Angeles, Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Hoboken over sanctuary laws. The White House and DOJ did not immediately respond to The Post's requests for comment.
Boston Globe
37 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Meet the Harvard Law alum at the center of the White House's campaign against Harvard
To get Harvard to that point, the administration has implemented a multipronged pressure campaign that includes canceling Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Mailman, a 2015 law school graduate, is the White House's senior policy strategist and a deputy assistant to the president. She is a right hand to deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, atop the nerve center of the White House on Trump's policy priorities. That includes Trump's current campaign against Harvard and other universities under the stated objective of ending diversity policies the administration considers discriminatory and combating antisemitism, particularly the protests and environment on campuses since Hamas's 2023 attack on Israel and the ensuing war in Gaza. Advertisement While Mailman credits other officials across the administration with coming up with many of the measures so far, she coordinates and spearheads the execution of Trump's vision and ideas. Advertisement Her role as a central player in the high-stakes confrontation has emerged from interviews, press accounts, and internal documents unearthed during legal challenges to the administration's canceling of funding. Mailman, 37, declined to discuss what the administration specifically wants from Harvard, but she pointed to other universities' settlements as a roadmap. 'There's almost a fear of [reaching an agreement] because it might be seen as too pro-Trump,' Mailman said. 'And it's like, don't be scared. Penn survived it. Columbia survived it.' Columbia University, an early target of the administration, this week Harvard has taken and has sued the government over canceled research funding and efforts to bar international students. Mailman cited the Columbia agreement as showing the administration's priorities: 'quality and fairness, a commitment to ending racial hierarchies, but an equal commitment to academic freedom and freedom of speech.' Advertisement 'There is nothing in that deal that would constrain academic freedom or freedom of speech, or micromanage the university,' she continued. Harvard declined to comment on Mailman or the negotiations. Though she makes frequent media appearances, Mailman is a lesser-known member of the administration. A Trump veteran from his first term, she left Washington after he left office, eventually settling with her husband and two small children in Texas, where her family still lives. She initially resisted joining the White House again, but Miller recruited her back and she commutes between D.C. and Texas each week. She will soon be stepping down from her current role and moving back home, but she intends to continue working for the administration on issues including higher education in a more limited capacity. Interviews with eight former classmates, friends, and former colleagues describe Mailman as a smart, energetic, amiable, driven person who doesn't suffer fools. They describe her as an intellectual conservative who is passionate about effectuating change in the world, but not a longtime activist looking for a political career. Her entree into Trump's West Wing came after a Harvard Law School classmate connected her with the administration. She was working for a law firm in Denver after an appellate clerkship when a fellow Harvard Law alum reached out and notified her that his colleague, Rob Porter and Trump's new staff secretary, was hiring. 'He texted me and said, 'Do you want to work in the center of the universe?'' Mailman recalled. 'And I said, 'I hate New York,' and he said 'No, the White House.' And that was it.' Advertisement Derek Lyons, Mailman's former colleague from the first administration, said she impressed the team immediately with her résumé, interview, and readiness to move to D.C. from Denver within days of getting a job in Porter's office. 'She won people over with high competence, enormous drive, strong work ethic, and high energy,' Lyons said. 'She was often seen as somebody who could execute at a very high level under intense time constraints. She's an excellent lawyer, but also understands policy nuances and political nuances.' A Kansas native 'who came from nothing from the middle of nowhere,' as she describes it, Mailman has a bachelor's degree from the University of Kansas, served two years with Teach for America, and has a master's degree in elementary education and teaching from the University of Missouri-St. Louis. She entered Harvard Law School in 2012 and became president of the school's chapter of the Mailman said that during her time at Harvard, the class did not feel divided by partisanship even though students had different leanings, a sentiment shared by her classmates who spoke to the Globe. Mailman had and maintains friendships with political liberals. Advertisement In the years since, however, she said Harvard and other top institutions have lost their way, coddling students and 'glorifying victimization' to create a culture that isn't producing resilient leaders. She is particularly passionate about rooting out diversity initiatives — which some in her orbit attribute in part to her own self-made biography, strong belief in meritocracy, and distaste for elitism — as well as advocating for barring transgender people from domains historically reserved for women. Between administrations, she litigated on that issue with the Independent Women's Forum, a conservative-leaning advocacy organization. She authored She didn't seek out her role in the Harvard talks, but nevertheless embraces it. Ultimately, she said, the administration and Harvard largely want the same things. 'I think Harvard thinks that it is excellent, I think it wants to be excellent, I think it knows what excellence looks like,' Mailman said. 'I think there's some desire to not be seen as a Trump lackey or bend the knee to Trump, and like, whatever, do what you need to do to have the [messaging] that you need. 'But at the end of the day, I think it should be the case that our vision and their vision is the same, which is: How do we create the next generation of great leaders, science, and medicine.' Mike Damiano of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Tal Kopan can be reached at
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit against Chicago ‘sanctuary' laws
CHICAGO — A judge in Illinois dismissed a Trump administration lawsuit Friday that sought to disrupt limits Chicago imposes on cooperation between federal immigration agents and local police. The lawsuit, filed in February, alleged that so-called sanctuary laws in the nation's third-largest city 'thwart' federal efforts to enforce immigration laws. It argued that local laws run counter to federal laws by restricting 'local governments from sharing immigration information with federal law enforcement officials' and preventing immigration agents from identifying 'individuals who may be subject to removal.' Judge Lindsay Jenkins of the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants' motion for dismissal. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said that he was pleased with the decision and that the city is safer when police focus on the needs of Chicagoans. 'This ruling affirms what we have long known: that Chicago's Welcoming City Ordinance is lawful and supports public safety. The City cannot be compelled to cooperate with the Trump Administration's reckless and inhumane immigration agenda,' he said in a statement. Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, welcomed the ruling, saying in a social media post, 'Illinois just beat the Trump Administration in federal court.' The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security and did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment. The administration has filed a series of lawsuits targeting state or city policies it sees as interfering with immigration enforcement, including those in Los Angeles, New York City, Denver and Rochester, N.Y. It sued four New Jersey cities in May. Heavily Democratic Chicago has been a sanctuary city for decades and has beefed up its laws several times, including during President Trump's first term in 2017. That same year, then-Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, signed more statewide sanctuary protections into law, putting him at odds with his party. There is no official definition for sanctuary policies or sanctuary cities. The terms generally describe limits on local cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE enforces U.S. immigration laws nationwide but sometimes seeks state and local help.
