After Park Avenue Shooting, Anti-Muslim Disinformation Spread Rapidly
Mr. Mamdani's surprise victory in the Democratic primary last month, coming from the far left, stirred up anti-Muslim animus not just in New York but also in pockets nationwide.
The right-wing agitator Laura Loomer, who has promoted numerous conspiracy theories — and who has become a confidant of President Trump — led the charge in blaming Mr. Mamdani for the attack, in which a gunman killed a police officer and three other people before shooting himself. 'The cop killer in NYC who just killed an NYPD officer was a Mamdani supporter,' she posted on X, adding, '@ZohranKMamdani is inspiring a generation of pro-Islamic cop killers. This is why you don't elect Muslim immigrants to office.'
Contributing to the confusion, especially in those first hours after the shooting, when details were scarce, was the name of one of the victims: Didarul Islam, a New York police officer and Bangladeshi immigrant who was working off-duty as a security guard.
Officer Islam, 36, was a father of two, with a third child on the way; a mentor to other Bangladeshi immigrants; and an active member of his mosque. Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch lauded his service to the city. 'He made the ultimate sacrifice, shot in cold blood, wearing a uniform that stood for the promise that he made to this city,' she said. 'He died as he lived: a hero.'
Around his home in the Parkchester section of the Bronx, members of the Bangladeshi community gathered Monday night to show support and grief for his family, and played down the anti-Muslim comments beginning to circulate, said Nurul Islam, a friend of Officer Islam's and secretary of the American Bangladeshi Welfare Organization in the Bronx. 'The killer is the killer,' Mr. Islam said. 'He doesn't care who is Muslim, who is non-Muslim.'
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
Time Magazine
14 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
What Trump Has to Do With Texas Democrats Fleeing the State
A political showdown is unfolding in Texas over a contentious redistricting plan backed by President Donald Trump that could reshape several congressional districts to favor Republicans. More than 50 Democratic members of the Texas House fled the state on Sunday in protest, relocating to blue states in an effort to deny the chamber the quorum needed to pass the proposed map. The plan, championed by Governor Greg Abbott and designed with input from the Trump Administration, aims to shift five Texas congressional seats to Republicans—a move that could strengthen the party's narrow majority in the U.S. House ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Republicans have defended the plan as a legal mid-cycle adjustment reflecting population growth and political trends. But Democrats and civil rights groups have described it as an aggressive gerrymander designed to entrench one-party rule and dilute minority voting power. The confrontation has effectively frozen the Texas legislature. On Monday, Abbott said he would begin trying to remove Democratic lawmakers from office if they did not return to the state. Here is what to know about the fight. Redistricting typically occurs once per decade in each state following the census. But Texas Republicans broke that tradition last week by proposing a new map mid-decade after Trump pushed them to redraw the state's congressional districts so that the GOP would be more likely to win more seats in the midterm elections next year. Currently, Republicans hold 25 of Texas's 38 congressional seats. The new map would reshape several Democratic-held districts in major metropolitan areas like Dallas, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio, as well as in the Rio Grande Valley, a historically Democratic stronghold that has recently shown signs of shifting Republican. By adding conservative-leaning voters to these districts, Republicans aim to flip up to five seats. 'There could be some other states we're going to get another three, or four or five in addition. Texas would be the biggest one.' Trump said in July when asked about the Texas redistricting plan. 'Just a simple redrawing we pick up five seats.' Governor Abbott has defended the redistricting as a necessary step to ensure Texans have fair representation, citing a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that challenged the protection of so-called 'coalition districts' under the Voting Rights Act. The court found that these districts—where minority groups are drawn into the same district to form a majority—may not be entitled to the same safeguards as traditional majority-minority districts. Abbott and Republican lawmakers argue that this ruling necessitates a redraw of several districts to better reflect current legal standards and population changes. By fleeing to other states, Democrats in the Texas House have effectively stalled the legislative process—at least for now—by denying Republicans the quorum needed to pass the redistricting plan. More than 50 Democrats traveled to Illinois, New York, and other Democratic strongholds, placing themselves outside Texas jurisdiction and legislative enforcement powers. They contend that the redistricting plan violates federal voting rights protections by diluting the power of minority voters, particularly Black and Latino communities that have historically been underrepresented. They also argue that the mid-decade redrawing itself is unprecedented and undermines long-established norms designed to prevent partisan manipulation. Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows presided over a mostly empty chamber Monday afternoon and suggested that Democrats who left could face fines or other legal consequences. Abbott has cited a nonbinding 2021 legal opinion by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton suggesting that absent lawmakers could be declared to have forfeited their seats. 'Come and take it,' the Democratic caucus said in a joint statement, invoking the revolutionary-era Texas slogan. Texas state Representative Vikki Goodwin wrote on X that she's 'willing to take the risk of being arrested, removed from office, or fined $500 a day' and framed the walkout as a larger pushback against the Trump agenda. 'By trying to gain five additional Republican seats in Congress, Trump is hoping to continue implementing harmful policies after the 2026 elections. I will do everything in my power to stop the rigging of our congressional districts in Texas.' Democratic governors in blue states—including New York's Kathy Hochul, California's Gavin Newsom, and Illinois' J.B. Pritzker—have offered safe haven and political backing to the lawmakers who fled Texas. Hochul appeared with a group of them Monday in Albany and called the GOP's redistricting effort a 'modern-day stagecoach heist.' 'If Republicans are willing to rewrite the rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us with no choice,' Hochul said. 'We must do the same. You have to fight fire with fire.' In theory, Democratic-led states could attempt their own mid-decade redraws to claw back seats—but in practice, many are constrained by independent, non-partisan redistricting commissions or state laws banning gerrymandering. New York, for example, would require a constitutional amendment to override its commission's map. California is similarly bound, though soon after Texas Republicans unveiled their new maps, Newsom posted on social media that "California won't sit back and watch this happen." Illinois, where Democrats already control 14 of 17 House seats, is one of the few blue states where lawmakers have more latitude to adjust lines—but even there, options are limited. Still, Governor Pritzker signaled a willingness to explore aggressive countermeasures. 'Everything has to be on the table,' he said. National Democrats have rallied behind the Texas lawmakers. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries traveled to Austin last week to pledge support, and Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin accused the GOP of trying to rig the system 'because they know that they're on track to lose the House majority next year.' Any new map will face an all-but-certain lawsuit. But it could still end up being the map Texas uses in next year's midterm elections. That could have ripple effects nationwide, influencing the balance of power in Congress and setting the tone for increasingly aggressive redistricting battles in other states. Currently, Republicans hold a slim 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives. The new redistricting plan in Texas aims to flip up to five Democratic-held districts, potentially making it harder for Democrats to reclaim control of the House. The Trump Administration has also put pressure on Missouri Republicans to pursue a new map that could give the GOP more seats in Congress. Ohio will redraw its congressional maps later this year, and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has suggested that his state is also considering drawing new House maps. While the walkout over the Texas maps may delay a vote, history suggests it may not prevent it. Texas Democrats staged a similar quorum break in 2021 over a controversial voting bill. They stayed away for 38 days—but when they returned, Republicans passed the bill anyway. Similarly, Texas Republicans pursued an aggressive 2003 redistricting push by U.S. Rep. Tom Delay, a Texas Republican who was House Majority Leader at the time. Democrats fled the state twice. The effort stalled—but didn't stop—the Republican map, which ultimately helped the GOP win control of the U.S. House in 2004. This time, Democrats may be hoping for a wave of litigation to stall the maps before the 2026 midterms.
Los Angeles Times
15 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
August recess can't hide tensions ahead for Congress on spending and Trump nominations
WASHINGTON — Lawmakers have left Washington for the annual August recess, but a few weeks of relative quiet on the U.S. Capitol grounds can't mask the partisan tensions that are brewing on government funding and President Trump's nominees. It could make for a momentous September. Here's a look at what's ahead when lawmakers return after the Labor Day holiday. Lawmakers will use much of September to work on spending bills for the coming budget year, which begins Oct. 1. They likely will need to pass a short-term spending measure to keep the government funded for a few weeks while they work on a longer-term measure that covers the full year. It's not unusual for leaders from both parties to blame the other party for a potential shutdown, but the rhetoric began extra early this year, signaling the threat of a stoppage is more serious than usual. On Monday, Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries sent their Republican counterparts a sharply-worded letter calling for a meeting to discuss 'the government funding deadline and the health care crisis you have visited upon the American people.' They said it will take bipartisanship to avert a 'painful, unnecessary shutdown.' 'Yet it is clear that the Trump Administration and many in your party are preparing to go it alone and continue to legislate on a solely Republican basis,' said the letter sent to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson. Republicans have taken note of the warnings and are portraying the Democrats as itching for a shutdown they hope to blame on the GOP. 'It was disturbing to hear the Democrat leader threaten to shut down the government in his July 8 Dear Colleague letter,' Thune said on Saturday. '... I really hope that Democrats will not embrace that position but will continue to work with Republicans to fund the government.' So far, the House has approved two of the 12 annual spending bills, mostly along party lines. The Senate has passed three on a strongly bipartisan basis. The House is pursuing steep, non-defense spending cuts. The Senate is rejecting many of those cuts. One side will have to give. And any final bill will need some Democratic support to generate the 60 votes necessary to get a spending measure to the finish line. Some Democratic senators are also wanting assurances from Republicans that there won't be more efforts in the coming weeks to claw back or cancel funding already approved by Congress. 'If Republicans want to make a deal, then let's make a deal, but only if Republicans include an agreement they won't take back that deal a few weeks later,' said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tenn., a veteran member of the House Appropriations committee, said the Democratic minority in both chambers has suffered so many legislative losses this year, 'that they are stuck between a rock and their voting base.' Democrats may want to demonstrate more resistance to Trump, but they would rue a shutdown, he warned. 'The reality would be, if the government were shut down, the administration, Donald Trump, would have the ability to decide where to spend and not spend,' Fleischmann said. 'Schumer knows that, Jeffries knows that. We know that. I think it would be much more productive if we start talking about a short-term (continuing resolution.)' Republicans are considering changes to Senate rules to get more of Trump's nominees confirmed. Thune said last week that during the same point in Joe Biden's presidency, 49 of his 121 civilian nominees had been confirmed on an expedited basis through a voice vote or a unanimous consent request. Trump has had none of his civilian nominees confirmed on an expedited basis. Democrats have insisted on roll call votes for all of them, a lengthy process than can take days. 'I think they're desperately in need of change,' Thune said of Senate rules for considering nominees. 'I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations, is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.' Schumer said a rules change would be a 'huge mistake,' especially as Senate Republicans will need Democratic votes to pass spending bills and other legislation moving forward. The Senate held a rare weekend session as Republicans worked to get more of Trump's nominees confirmed. Negotiations focused on advancing dozens of additional Trump nominees in exchange for some concessions on releasing some already approved spending. At times, lawmakers spoke of progress on a potential deal. But it was clear that there would be no agreement when Trump attacked Schumer on social media Saturday evening and told Republicans to pack it up and go home. 'Tell Schumer, who is under tremendous political pressure from within his own party, the Radical Left Lunatics, to GO TO HELL!' Trump posted on Truth Social. Freking writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Mary Clare Jalonick and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.
Los Angeles Times
15 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Report: How permitting requirements slow down California's transit projects
California's high-speed rail project has been heavily scrutinized in recent months for its long delays and rising budget. In its decision to pull federal funding from the project, the Trump administration blamed state leadership and the high-speed rail authority. A new report from a San Diego nonprofit points to third-party permitting requirements as another culprit to the project's long delays, and a reason for the slowdown on transit projects across the state. The report from the Circulate San Diego suggests that requirements first imposed decades ago to stop infrastructure projects from ripping up neighborhoods have created new hurdles that have put innovations around transportation years behind schedule. 'The policies meant to restrict highways from separating communities, are now preventing the construction of public transit, meant to stitch communities together,' Colin Parent, the chief executive and general council of Circulate San Diego, wrote in 'The Powerless Brokers: Why California Can't Build Transit.' The report was released Monday. The delays in transit projects aren't isolated to California, Parent said. But because the state's high-speed rail train is one of the most ambitious and widely criticized projects in the nation, the consequences of delays are staggering here. Multiple jurisdictions are often required to sign off on a project, outside of the leading transit agency. In the case of high-speed rail, Parent describes disputes that have occurred between the authority and city officials that have prolonged the timeline for construction. In Wasco, for example, disagreements between the city and the authority over the creation of an underpass and other projects led to years-long delays on construction and increased costs. 'I think a lot of people assume that when you're building transit, the transit agency decides what projects they want to build, they get funding, they do an environmental review, and then they're ready to go and to build things. And that's just not how it works,' Parent told The Times. 'They have to go through a whole new series of processes to receive permits and other agreements in order to actually build the projects that they've approved, and those additional sets of processes can create all sorts of delays, additional costs and other challenges to building the projects that policymakers say that we want to do.' Environmental reviews can take time, as can trying to gain public support. Not every city or county faces the same challenges when it comes to coordination on projects. The Los Angeles and Bay Area area regions each include 27 separate transit operators, Parent said. In the San Diego region, there are only two. In Los Angeles, Metro often has to coordinate with the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Bureau of Engineering and Street Services. In the report, Parent highlighted the transit agency's extension project underneath Wilshire Boulevard for the D Line, formerly known as the Purple Line. The project saw broad support from city officials, but faced initial permitting challenges over demands by DWP and the Bureau of Engineering. In the early and middle 20th century, U.S. cities' infrastructure projects went unchecked, leading to the destruction of communities that largely displaced disadvantaged and working class residents. Perhaps no one represents the era better than the late urban planner Robert Moses, who shaped the New York City skyline and whose highway and bridge projects razed city blocks and neighborhoods. From his multiple appointed positions in state and local government, he was one of the most powerful and divisive figures in the state from the 1920s to the 1960s. In an effort to decentralize that kind of power with a system of checks and balances, community advocates pushed for laws to establish environmental standards and regulate project approval so that affected communities could be represented in decision-making. While no one has pushed for a return to the days of someone like Moses, Parent and state lawmakers in California believe that today's requirements have created new obstacles. 'A lot of the rules related to permitting that have gotten in the way of building infrastructure, including public transit, have really expanded since the 70s,' Parent said Monday. 'There's been this multi-decade growth in the kinds of barriers and hoops that applicants and public agencies have to jump through in order to get projects.' So, what's the solution? Because the delays in transit projects play out throughout the U.S., Parent believes standards in Quebec and Ontario could present a better model. There, transit agencies are allowed to self-permit if outside parties do not meet specific timeline requirements when it comes to permitting. 'Those local governments are under a timeline, and if they don't review and approve or deny those permits within a period of time, then the transit agency gets to self permit,' Parent said. State Sen. Scott Weiner (D-San Francisco) introduced a bill this year that takes a similar approach. With focus on high-speed rail, the bill would implement time limits on third-party's approvals and denial process. During a recent state assembly hearing, Wiener said that 'any city or water district or special district where some sort of encroachment permit is required' can slow down a project's process by simply doing nothing. 'They can just not respond or drag their feet — sometimes for good reason … sometimes for not good reasons — and there is nothing that, in this case, high speed rail, can do about it,' he said.
