OPINION:
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s efforts to turn New York City Hall into a platform for his foreign policy agenda have encountered constitutional limits.
After repeatedly suggesting, during his campaign and after taking office, that his administration might arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the upcoming United Nations General Assembly, Mr. Mamdani reversed course. After a City Law Department review, he acknowledged that the city lacks independent legal authority to enforce an International Criminal Court warrant.
He then called on the federal government to execute the warrant.
Mr. Mamdani’s reversal exposed the gulf between his earlier threats and the lawful authority of his office. Before acknowledging that New York City lacked the power to enforce the warrant, he repeatedly called Mr. Netanyahu a “war criminal” who “belongs in The Hague” and accused the prime minister of genocide.
President Trump responded that Mr. Netanyahu “will not be arrested, in any way, shape, or form, while in the United States of America.”
Although Mr. Trump did not name Mr. Mamdani, his statement underscored the constitutional issue: Responsibility for the nation’s foreign relations rests principally with the federal government, not city halls.
A mayor cannot substitute his personal foreign policy agenda for that of the U.S. Mr. Mamdani’s assertion that New York City is a “city of international law” does not alter that reality. Neither the United States nor Israel is a party to the Rome Statute, which created the ICC.
An ICC warrant is not automatically enforceable by local police, and neither federal nor New York law authorizes the New York Police Department to execute it.
Mr. Netanyahu’s anticipated appearance at the U.N. General Assembly would not be an ordinary visit by a private citizen. He would travel as the head of government of a member state to participate in official proceedings.
Under the U.N. Headquarters Agreement, the U.S. must permit the transit of member-state representatives to and from U.N. headquarters. Authority over admission into the U.S. and the conduct of foreign affairs rests with the federal government.
Stripped of any legal foundation, Mr. Mamdani’s proposal was never a viable law enforcement policy. It was an attempt to leverage the symbolic power of the New York City government to advance his personal foreign policy agenda.
Criticism of any government, including Israel, is legitimate, just as advocacy for Palestinian rights is not inherently antisemitic. Still, that distinction cannot become a shield for persistent vilification, discriminatory double standards or the dismissal of a minority’s legitimate concerns.
Those concerns were heightened during Mr. Mamdani’s mayoral campaign, in which he declined to condemn the slogan “Globalize the intifada,” a phrase that many Jews associate with suicide bombings that deliberately target civilians.
Rather than acknowledge that many Jewish New Yorkers viewed the slogan as threatening, Mr. Mamdani initially offered alternative interpretations. Only after sustained public criticism did he discourage its use.
Those fears acquired renewed urgency earlier this month, when a Jewish man leaving a synagogue and an Asian man were stabbed in separate attacks on the streets of Manhattan. According to victims and witnesses, the alleged assailant shouted “Allahu akbar” during both attacks. He was subsequently charged with attempted murder and assault as hate crimes.
Mr. Mamdani condemned the attacks, but his initial refusal to condemn “Globalize the intifada,” together with his repeated threats to arrest Mr. Netanyahu, has reinforced doubts among many Jewish New Yorkers about whether their concerns receive the same consideration afforded to other communities.
History teaches that the isolation of a minority group often begins with the demand that its members answer collectively for the actions of others. Americans may disagree over Israel’s right to self-defense or whether Israeli military operations comply with international humanitarian law, but such debates must never become a basis for assigning collective responsibility to Jewish Americans for the actions of the Israeli government.
The Constitution assigns primary responsibility for foreign affairs to the federal government for a reason: The U.S. must speak with one voice abroad.
A mayor’s first obligation is not to conduct an independent foreign policy or threaten foreign leaders with actions he or she is not empowered to take. It is to uphold the rule of law and ensure that every resident receives equal protection and equal treatment under it.
That, not political theater, is the first duty of public office.
• Anita Parlow is a lawyer and author specializing in international law and hybrid warfare. She has served as a Fulbright scholar and has lectured at Georgetown University and the University of the District of Columbia School of Law. She is currently completing a book on Russia’s hybrid warfare in the Arctic.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.