Listen to the article
Republican Officials Target NYC Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani’s Citizenship in Unprecedented Move
In the wake of Zohran Mamdani’s decisive victory in the New York City mayoral election, Republican lawmakers in Washington have launched an extraordinary campaign questioning his citizenship status and attempting to prevent him from taking office.
Mamdani, 34, made history as the city’s first Muslim and first South Asian mayor-elect, but his achievement has been overshadowed by a coordinated effort from Republican officials to challenge his right to serve.
President Donald Trump has threatened to withhold federal funds from New York City following Mamdani’s election, while also promoting baseless claims questioning the Ugandan-born politician’s citizenship status and falsely labeling him a communist.
Several Republican lawmakers have gone further, calling for investigations into Mamdani’s naturalization process. Representative Andy Ogles issued a stark statement on October 29, claiming, “If Mamdani lied on his naturalization documents, he doesn’t get to be a citizen, and he certainly doesn’t get to run for mayor of New York City.” Ogles demanded that U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi investigate Mamdani, adding, “If this is confirmed, put him on the first flight back to Uganda.”
Immigration experts, however, have found no merit in these claims. Mamdani moved to the United States in 1998 at age seven and became a naturalized citizen in 2018, well within the standard requirements for citizenship. For adults to naturalize, they typically must have lived continuously in the country as a lawful permanent resident for five years, or three years if married to a U.S. citizen.
Jeremy McKinney, a prominent immigration attorney, explained that denaturalization is “an extreme, rare remedy” requiring substantial evidence of either illegal procurement or a willful, material misrepresentation during the application process. “I’ve seen no credible proof he was ineligible when he took the oath or that any omission was material,” McKinney stated.
The allegations center on two main claims. First, that Mamdani failed to disclose supposed support for the “Holy Land Five,” referencing five men convicted in 2008 of providing material support to Hamas. Second, that he did not disclose membership in the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which some Republican lawmakers inaccurately characterize as a communist organization.
Experts have dismissed both claims. The DSA is not a communist party but rather represents democratic socialism, which emerged as an alternative to communism and generally supports representative democracy. Harvey Klehr, an Emory University expert on American communism, has clarified that democratic socialists “reject the communist hostility to representative democracy, as well as the communist belief in state ownership of the means of production.”
The Council on American-Islamic Relations has condemned the attacks against Mamdani as racist and Islamophobic. Mamdani himself addressed the rhetoric in an October interview with MSNBC, stating, “Islamophobia is something that is endemic to politics across this country… We have seen it normalized. We have seen it accepted.”
Some opponents have taken a different approach. The New York Young Republican Club has invoked the 14th Amendment, claiming Mamdani provided “aid and comfort” to U.S. enemies by supporting “pro-Hamas” groups. This would require a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to declare him ineligible for office – a highly unlikely scenario that could still face Supreme Court challenges if passed.
Legal experts note that the process to revoke U.S. citizenship is complex and rarely successful. Cassandra Burke Robertson, a Case Western Reserve University law professor specializing in denaturalization, called it “extraordinarily unlikely that a proceeding against Mamdani would gain any traction.”
However, immigration law professor Irina Manta of Hofstra University notes that denaturalizations have become more frequent under the Trump administration. In June, the Justice Department issued a memo directing lawyers to prioritize certain denaturalization cases, including those involving perceived national security concerns.
If Mamdani were to have his citizenship revoked, his status would revert to lawful permanent residence, disqualifying him from serving as mayor of America’s largest city. The unprecedented attempt to prevent a duly elected mayor from taking office through citizenship challenges has raised significant concerns about the intersection of immigration policy and democratic governance.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


18 Comments
As someone who follows mining and energy news closely, I’m concerned that this controversy could distract from important discussions around issues like critical mineral supply chains and the energy transition.
Excellent point. We need our leaders focused on pragmatic solutions, not political theater.
While I may not agree with all of Mamdani’s policies, he was democratically elected and has a right to serve. These citizenship attacks seem like a cynical ploy to undermine the will of the voters.
Well put. Healthy political discourse requires respecting the outcomes of free and fair elections.
While I may not agree with all of Mamdani’s policy positions, he was elected fairly and has a right to serve. These citizenship challenges appear to be a politically motivated attempt to override the will of the voters.
Well put. Healthy democracy requires respecting election outcomes, even when we disagree with the results.
I’m curious to see how the legal process unfolds here. Citizenship challenges should be handled through proper legal channels, not political grandstanding.
Absolutely. The rule of law must be upheld, regardless of political affiliation.
I’m skeptical of the claims being made here. Citizenship challenges should be based on clear evidence, not political grandstanding. Voters have spoken, and their choice should be respected.
Well said. Undermining election results without strong justification is a dangerous precedent.
As a mining and commodities enthusiast, I hope this political drama doesn’t distract from important policy discussions around issues like critical minerals supply chains.
Agreed. The focus should be on practical issues that impact people’s lives, not partisan bickering.
This seems like a concerning attempt to undermine the democratic process. Voters have spoken, and their choice should be respected.
Well said. Challenging election results without clear evidence sets a dangerous precedent.
This seems like a concerning overreach by Republican officials. Questioning a duly elected official’s citizenship is a serious matter that requires substantial evidence, not partisan political attacks.
Agreed. Elected leaders should be focused on serving their constituents, not engaging in these kinds of divisive tactics.
This seems like a concerning attempt to undermine the democratic process. As a follower of mining and commodity news, I hope this controversy doesn’t distract from important policy discussions around issues like critical minerals supply chains.
Agreed. We need our leaders focused on pragmatic solutions, not partisan attacks.