New York City ushered in a new era on January 1, 2026, as Zohran Mamdani was officially sworn in as the city’s first Muslim mayor, marking a historic moment for both the city and the nation. But Mamdani wasted no time making his mark; within hours of his midnight inauguration, he issued sweeping executive orders that reversed several controversial policies of his predecessor, Eric Adams, particularly those relating to Israel, antisemitism, and freedom of speech.
The symbolism of Mamdani’s rise was unmistakable. In a ceremony held just after midnight at a decommissioned subway station beneath City Hall, Mamdani placed his hand on the Quran to take his oath. Later that day, he arrived at City Hall in a taxi for a public inauguration, where U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders—one of Mamdani’s political heroes—administered the ceremonial oath for a second time. According to The New York Times, the event was both a celebration and a signal of the new direction the city would be taking.
That direction became clear almost immediately. Mamdani’s first executive order revoked all orders signed by Adams after September 26, 2024—the date when Adams was indicted on federal corruption charges, including bribery and campaign finance offenses. (Those charges were later dismissed, but not before casting a shadow over Adams’s final months in office.) As reported by The Times of Israel, this blanket revocation included several high-profile orders related to Israel and antisemitism—issues that have sharply divided New York’s diverse communities.
Among the rescinded orders was Adams’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. Adopted by many governments and institutions worldwide, the IHRA definition is controversial because it equates certain criticisms of Israel with antisemitism. Seven of its eleven examples specifically reference criticism of Israel, such as denying the Jewish people the right to self-determination or calling the existence of a Jewish state a "racist endeavor." Critics, including many progressive Jewish organizations, argue that codifying the IHRA definition chills legitimate debate about Israeli policy and Palestinian rights.
Phylisa Wisdom, executive director of the New York Jewish Agenda, told The New York Times, “There is not consensus necessarily around whether the I.H.R.A. definition of antisemitism should be codified in this way. Not everyone thinks you need to codify I.H.R.A to keep the Jewish people safe, in the same way we don’t necessarily have codified definitions of other forms of hate.”
Also revoked was Adams’s executive order barring city agencies from boycotting or divesting from Israel—a direct response to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Mamdani, a vocal supporter of BDS and a fierce critic of Israel’s policies, had campaigned on rolling back these measures. According to The Media Line, Mamdani has repeatedly refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state and has labeled Israel an apartheid state, calling for equal rights for all religions within its borders.
The new mayor’s actions have sparked intense debate within New York’s Jewish communities and beyond. Some Jewish leaders and conservative politicians have voiced deep concern. Brooklyn Republican Councilwoman Inna Vernikov took to social media, warning that Mamdani’s moves would embolden "pro-Hamas antisemites." She argued that one of the revoked orders "protects from discrimination Jews who believe in self-determination." Such sentiments reflect the anxiety among some segments of the Jewish community, who see Mamdani’s positions as a threat to their safety and identity.
Yet, not all Jewish New Yorkers share these fears. Mamdani’s campaign drew support from a broad coalition, including many progressive Jews who were inspired by his promises to protect and celebrate the city’s Jewish residents while also defending free speech and the rights of Palestinians. As The New York Times reported, Mamdani has been clear in his condemnation of classic antisemitism—such as swastika graffiti and antisemitic tropes—while maintaining that criticism of Israeli government policies must not be conflated with hatred of Jewish people.
Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, welcomed the revocation of Adams’s orders. She told The New York Times, “Both of those orders appeared to be last-ditch attempts to suppress viewpoints that the mayor and his benefactors disagreed with, especially since one of them was issued just in the last few weeks. It is no surprise, and it is good news, that our new mayor has revoked them.” Lieberman further argued that such policies "have a chilling effect on speech that is protected by the First Amendment," emphasizing that "the right to free speech does not depend on your viewpoint, and that is true for speech about Israel or Gaza, it is true about political activism about that conflict, and it is true about any other political issue that we face."
One area Mamdani left untouched was the city’s Office to Combat Antisemitism, established by Adams in May 2025. Mamdani’s Executive Order No. 2, outlining the mayor’s office structure, confirmed that the office would remain in place, though it’s unclear whether its leadership or approach will change. At a news conference on January 1, Mamdani reaffirmed his commitment to the safety and well-being of Jewish New Yorkers, stating, “That is an issue that we take very seriously and as part of the commitment that we’ve made to Jewish New Yorkers: to not only protect them, but to celebrate and cherish them.”
The broader implications of Mamdani’s decisions are still unfolding. The revocation of the IHRA definition and the anti-BDS order could influence how anti-Zionist speech is treated in city agencies—from the NYPD to the school system. It also raises questions about the balance between combating hate and preserving free speech, especially in a city as diverse and politically engaged as New York.
Underlying all of this is the ongoing debate over the boundaries of legitimate criticism of Israel and the responsibilities of government in protecting vulnerable communities. As incidents of antisemitism have risen in recent years, some have called for stronger legal definitions and enforcement, while others warn against policies that might stifle dissent or political activism.
For now, Mamdani’s bold first steps have set the stage for what promises to be a contentious and closely watched mayoralty. His actions have already sparked passionate responses from all corners of the city, reflecting the deep divisions—and the vibrant debates—that define New York. As the new administration settles in, the city will be watching closely to see how these changes play out in practice, and whether Mamdani can deliver on his promise to protect all New Yorkers—no matter their background or beliefs.
