Aggregator

Socialist Mamdani Concedes NYC Can't Arrest Netanyahu, Breaking Another Campaign Promise

Zero Rss
2 weeks 6 days ago
Socialist Mamdani Concedes NYC Can't Arrest Netanyahu, Breaking Another Campaign Promise

With New York City rents at record highs, bus fares still in place, and the rise of the far left spooking taxpayers and businesses, Mayor Zohran Mamdani appears increasingly focused on playing world policeman instead of properly addressing the city's affordability crisis. On Tuesday night, the socialist mayor was forced to concede that he cannot execute the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, exposing yet another campaign promise he cannot fulfill.

"It is clear that we do not have the independent legal authority to enforce this warrant," Mamdani said in a video posted on X. "The federal government, however, does, and I call on them to join the ICC and execute this warrant," he added.

Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal. pic.twitter.com/YRezmW6YVx

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) July 22, 2026

Mamdani said his administration reviewed every available legal option but maintained that Netanyahu is "not welcome" in NYC. President Trump said Monday that Netanyahu would not be arrested anywhere in the U.S., while Israel's U.N. ambassador accused the socialist, pro-Islamist Mamdani of promoting Hamas propaganda.

During last year's campaign, Mamdani promised fellow socialists and Islamists that he would order city police to arrest Netanyahu under the ICC warrant. That pledge now adds to a growing list of unfulfilled promises, including lower rents, free buses, and other proposed handouts.

I don’t understand, so you lied when you were campaigning and said “as mayor of NYC I would arrest Netanyahu” @EndWokeness pic.twitter.com/DEQqk1alIo

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) July 22, 2026

Related:

While those socialist programs may remain politically attractive in the short term, financing them will become increasingly difficult if the wealthy continue to flee the metro area for red states, eroding the city's tax base and raising the risk of financial turmoil.

In 2024, ICC issued arrest warrants accusing Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant of crimes against humanity during Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza, allegations Israeli officials reject.

What the internet had to say:

What does that have to do with fixing potholes?

— nic carter (@nic_carter) July 22, 2026

Lol all of this tough to talk to say no you will not try to arrest him.

Limousine marxist to a tee.

— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) July 22, 2026

NYC is full of criminals, yet you care more about the leader of a foreign country than about the city that you are mayor of - although it's not surprising given that you and your wife are terrorist supporters.
May you be denaturalized and deported.

— Leftism (@LeftismForU) July 22, 2026 Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 11:10
Tyler Durden

Fifth Circuit To Rehear Drug Trafficker's Second Amendment Challenge

Zero Rss
2 weeks 6 days ago
Fifth Circuit To Rehear Drug Trafficker's Second Amendment Challenge

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

A federal appeals court voted to rehear a constitutional challenge to a federal law that prevents felons from possessing guns, weeks after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said he hoped a lower court would consider the law's constitutionality.

Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas poses for an official portrait at the East Conference Room of the Supreme Court building in Washington on Oct. 7, 2022. Alex Wong/Getty Images

The July 20 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit came after a three-judge panel of the same circuit on June 2 denied convicted drug trafficker Curtis Squire's challenge to Section 922(g)(1) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code. The felon-in-possession provision is part of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

Federal gun laws have largely been justified under the Constitution's commerce clause. The legal theory is that guns move in interstate commerce, meaning they are manufactured, sold, and transported across state lines. This means Congress can regulate gun possession, even inside the home, because it supposedly has an impact on the national market for firearms.

A majority of the judges sitting on the Fifth Circuit voted to grant the petition of Squire for a so-called en banc hearing before the full court. The panel had unanimously upheld Squire's conviction and sentence on June 2 for being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Squire had filed a so-called as-applied challenge to Section 922(g)(1), arguing the provision was unconstitutional as applied to him under the Second Amendment.

He cited the Supreme Court's landmark 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. That decision recognized a constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense and held that restrictions on guns must be deeply rooted in American history if they are to survive constitutional scrutiny.

Squire argued the Second Amendment allowed him to possess a firearm in his home, so the onus was on the government to prove there was a historical tradition justifying a lifetime ban on someone with his criminal past.

He also cited the high court's 2024 ruling in United States v. Rahimi, in which the justices upheld a federal gun control law that bars people under domestic violence-related restraining orders from possessing firearms.

The justices found in that case that the Second Amendment isn't violated when an individual is disarmed after a court has found him to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another.

Squire argued that precedent stands for the principle that the disarmament must be related to a specific finding that a person is dangerous and that he was not because he was not convicted of using violence. His position was that Section 922(g)(1) was a categorical ban that did not mandate an ongoing assessment of dangerousness, so it was overbroad when applied to him.

The panel rejected these arguments, saying it affirmed the conviction and sentence "because our historical tradition supports disarming drug traffickers based on their dangerousness."

The Fifth Circuit did not provide an explanation for its new ruling that sets aside the panel's decision, but Circuit Judge Stephen Higginson noted in his dissent that mere weeks ago, Thomas "asked lower courts to reexamine the constitutionality of [the legal provision] under the Commerce Clause."

"Already, our court answers the call," Higginson said.

The judge was referring to Thomas's concurring opinion on June 18 in United States v. Hemani, a case in which the high court ruled unanimously that the government may not prosecute a man for owning a firearm just because he has habitually smoked marijuana. The ruling clarified a provision of the Gun Control Act.

Thomas agreed that the drug user ban as applied should be struck down but warned that Section 922(g) provisions - including the felon ban - may exceed Congress's authority under the commerce clause.

Thomas said Section 922(g)(3) of the Gun Control Act, which bars illegal drug users from possessing firearms, "appears to exceed Congress's enumerated powers to regulate interstate commerce."

"As an original matter, the Commerce Clause authorizes Congress only 'to regulate the buying and selling of goods and services trafficked across state lines,'" he said.

The clause does not give Congress power to regulate "activities wholly separated from business, such as gun possession," he said.

"Congress cannot regulate the possession of every thing that ever traveled across state lines," Thomas added.

It is unclear when the Fifth Circuit will conduct the rehearing.

Tyler Durden Wed, 07/22/2026 - 10:50
Tyler Durden

zero rss