44.2 F
New York

tjvnews.com

Wednesday, January 14, 2026
CLASSIFIED ADS
LEGAL NOTICE
DONATE
SUBSCRIBE

TJV Editorial – Zohran Mamdani Must Have His US Citizenship Stripped Due to His Promotion of Terrorism

Related Articles

Must read

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

TJV Editorial – Zohran Mamdani Must Have His US Citizenship Stripped Due to His Promotion of Terrorism

In a democratic society, citizenship is not merely a legal status—it is a covenant. That covenant, rooted in loyalty to constitutional principles and public trust, should not be manipulated to shield those who openly sympathize with violent ideologies or glorify groups that threaten the foundational values of liberty, pluralism, and peace.

In the case of Zohran Mandani, a Democratic Socialist of America candidate for mayor of New York City, these principles aptly apply.

The resurgence of radical ideologies wrapped in the language of “justice” and “resistance” has not only reshaped the fringes of American political discourse—it has now made its way to the center stage. This is particularly true in the rise of political figures like Mamdani whose rhetoric and affiliations reveal a disturbing pattern: demonization of Israel, trivialization or denial of the Holocaust, and open endorsement of organizations condemned for supporting terrorism.

These developments should be met not just with political scrutiny, but with a rigorous legal and moral examination. As The Hill has documented, elected officials and political influencers are beginning to ask serious questions: Where is the legal threshold for revoking citizenship when affiliations with terrorism are misrepresented during the naturalization process? And what does it mean for a pluralistic democracy when individuals who benefit from its freedoms such as Mamdani actively work to dismantle them?

Denaturalization in the United States is rare, but not without precedent. According to the Department of Justice, denaturalization proceedings can be initiated under specific circumstances, primarily when an individual is found to have concealed or willfully misrepresented a material fact during the naturalization process, as is the case with Mamdani who did not admit his terrorist affiliations when apply for naturalized citizenship.

Denaturalization proceedings can be initiated for those such as Mamdani who have been affiliated with designated terrorist organizations or totalitarian ideologies during the relevant period, or otherwise obtained citizenship fraudulently.

 While the U.S. Supreme Court, in Schneiderman v. United States (1943), rightly imposed strict standards to prevent denaturalization from becoming a tool of political persecution, subsequent rulings—most notably Fedorenko v. United States (1981)—affirmed that misrepresentations related to wartime atrocities or terrorism can be grounds for revocation, regardless of the time elapsed since naturalization. This case law should be applied as it pertains to Mamdani.

In 2020, the DOJ created a specialized unit to pursue denaturalization against those who had concealed links to war crimes, human rights abuses, or terrorism. These proceedings are rooted not in political disagreement, but in preserving the integrity of U.S. citizenship and the safety of its citizens.

 But beyond the narrow lens of legal procedure lies a broader and more urgent threat: the normalization of antisemitism cloaked in the language of anti-Zionism or “anti-imperialism.” In recent years, slogans such as “Globalize the Intifada” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” have entered mainstream political rallies.

Mamdani has consistently invoked the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising to defend “globalizing the intifada.” The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, typically cautious in its public statements, felt compelled to denounce the exploitation of Holocaust imagery—clearly referring to Mamdani’s shocking comments. That is not merely poor judgment. It is moral vandalism. If Mamdani becomes mayor, we can expect a normalization of policies and rhetoric that vilify Israel, undermine Jewish institutions, and embolden radical elements that already threaten Jewish safety on our streets and campuses.

As the Anti-Defamation League has repeatedly warned, these slogans do not merely express discontent with Israeli policy; they deny the legitimacy of the Jewish state and evoke calls for its violent destruction.

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, while promoted by some as a nonviolent form of protest, has often provided cover for individuals such as Mamdani that openly support Iranian backed terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah—groups that do not advocate for peace, but for genocide. It is not coincidental that synagogues, Jewish day schools, and pro-Israel rallies have become targets of vandalism, threats, and assault in the aftermath of BDS-fueled campaigns.

The Republican Jewish Coalition did not mince words, calling Mamdani a “raging antisemite, anti-America, anti-Israel Democrat socialist.” They are right to be alarmed.

This rising tide of hostility has found a disturbing ally in the rise of Democratic Socialist politics, particularly in urban strongholds like New York City. While the democratic process must respect the electoral choices of constituents, it must also demand that candidates like Mamdani who are seeking high office reject the glorification of terrorism, historical revisionism, and hatred toward minority communities.

The First Amendment protects a wide array of expressive conduct. But it does not immunize speech from consequences when that speech reveals potentially fraudulent conduct related to naturalization, as in Mamdani’s case when it incites hatred and delegitimizes the right of a people to exist.

Rap lyrics or artistic expression, when stripped of context, can be ambiguous. But when a public official such as Mamdani openly praises individuals convicted of financing terrorist operations against civilians—as was the case with the Holy Land Foundation leaders convicted in 2008 for funneling money to Hamas—such statements cannot be dismissed as metaphor or cultural bravado. They warrant legal scrutiny.

The precedent is clear. In United States v. Aladekoba (2008), a Nigerian-born U.S. citizen was denaturalized for misrepresenting criminal activity during his immigration process. While no two cases are identical, the principle remains: if an individual concealed sympathy or affiliation with groups advocating violence during the immigration process, as did Mamdani, it may render their naturalization void ab initio—that is, invalid from the outset.

As Rep. Andy Ogles rightly emphasized, elected office is not a shield against accountability. When a candidate such as Mamdani who is running for the highest municipal office in America’s largest city appear to express solidarity with figures convicted of terrorism, or when they advocate for the dismantling of the Jewish state, it is not “courageous activism”—it is moral dereliction.

“Publicly praising the Holy Land Foundation’s convicted leadership as ‘my guys’ raises serious concerns about whether Mr. Mamdani held affiliations or sympathies he failed to disclose during the naturalization process,” Ogles wrote in a letter to US Attorney General Pam Bondi in regards to the initiation of a denaturalization proceeding against Mamdani. He further argued that while First Amendment protections might shield expressive speech, such as rap lyrics, the legal threshold is crossed if the speech reasonably implies conduct that could have affected one’s eligibility for U.S. citizenship.

In response to the outcome of the New York City mayoral primary, the New York Young Republican Club issued a pointed “call to action” via the social media platform X.

Declaring that candidate Mamdani posed a grave threat to the future of the city, the group urged swift federal intervention. “The radical Zohran Mamdani cannot be permitted to dismantle everything New Yorkers hold dear,” the club warned. They appealed directly to the president to enforce the long-dormant Communist Control Act as a legal mechanism to revoke Mamdani’s citizenship and initiate deportation proceedings.

The group also called upon key officials, including White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller and ICE director Tom Homan, to step in decisively. “Now is the moment to act,” the statement read. “The fate of New York rests in your hands.”

Following Mamdani’s primary win, Miller issued a scathing critique, framing the event as a dire example of unchecked immigration’s societal consequences. “This is what happens when a nation fails to manage its borders,” he remarked. Miller further accused the Democratic Party of aligning itself with an extremist agenda, saying they were backing a “hard-left ideologue determined to dismantle immigration enforcement and abolish America’s prison infrastructure.”

The Communist Control Act—signed into law by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1954—was a product of Cold War anxieties. Though rarely invoked today, it aimed to neutralize Communist influence within the U.S. by barring party members from holding certain roles and, in theory, outlawing the party’s activities altogether.

Those who claim that these critiques are rooted in Islamophobia or xenophobia miss the point. The issue is not religion or ethnicity—it is ideology. It is the difference between loyalty to democratic norms and subversion of them under the guise of progressivism.

New York City is home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. It is a city shaped by immigrants, but also one that has long demanded of its leaders a commitment to pluralism, safety, and truth. A candidate like Mamdani who denies the Holocaust, glorifies convicted terrorist financiers, or frames Jews as colonial oppressors has no place in the civic leadership of such a city—whether or not he holds a naturalization certificate.

The debate around denaturalization is not about political vengeance—it is about safeguarding the integrity of American values. In an era where antisemitism is on the rise globally and Jewish communities face unprecedented threats at home, the least our legal system and political leadership can do is demand that those who seek power such as Mamdani demonstrate unambiguous loyalty to truth, peace, and human dignity.

To fail in this regard is not merely a lapse of judgment—it is a betrayal of everything citizenship stands for.

4 COMMENTS

  1. Does it make TJV feel any better to post its virtue signaling “editorial”? Now that you’ve got that off your chest, will you go to war with the Jewish community and enemy mainstream institutions, and aggressively seek their removal and replacement? Are you going to actually replace the leadership or leave in protest and establish new organizations? Are you going to continue your absurd impotent irrelevant noise making? Are you going to actually confront your children and grandchildren with cutting off relations if they insist on being your existential enemies? Are you going to convince them that this is in fact an existential issue for you and the continuation of their war against you and the Jewish people will result in a true schism?

      • What exactly are you, TJV, recommending to your individual readers to do? You purportedly represent the American Jewish community. Are you urging your readers to confront their “Jewish”organizations? Are you going to urge your readers to vote Republican?

        My question remains: Will TJV go to war with the Jewish community and enemy mainstream institutions, and aggressively seek their removal and replacement?

  2. Are you at a minimum prepared to leave the enemy Democrat party, and join Jewish Republicans to defeat this Muslim Nazi?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest article