President Donald Trump threatened a federal takeover of New York if Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani wins the city’s mayoral race.
Mamdani, a New York state assemblyman, pulled off an upset win against former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the city’s June 24 Democratic mayoral primary. Mamdani will go on to face his Republican opponent, Curtis Sliwa, in the general election on Nov. 4.
Trump and other members of his administration have strongly advocated against Mamdani, a self-identified socialist, becoming mayor. The president said Mamdani’s hypothetical win would be a “disaster” and that he would take over and “run” New York instead. The president has additionally threatened to withhold federal funds from the state if Mamdani does not “behave himself” should he be elected mayor.
But could Trump really step in and “run” New York?
What were Trump’s comments?
During a July 8 Cabinet meeting, Trump said if a “communist” gets elected to run New York, he could take over the city.
“We have tremendous power at the White House to run places where we have to,” Trump said. “New York City will run properly. I’m going to bring New York back. I love New York. We’re going to straighten out New York. It’s going to — maybe we’re going to have to straighten it out from Washington.”
Can Trump actually ‘run’ New York?
The 10th Amendment to the Constitution explicitly states that some powers lie solely with the states, such as the right to establish local government. In this case, the people of New York have a right to elect their mayor without interference, whether they choose Mamdani or not.
While there is no precedent for a president choosing to “run” a city or initiate a federal takeover, there have been times when the president has sent in federal agencies to respond to emergencies and provide support.
One such case was in June, when Trump deployed troops from California’s National Guard to support federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents amid anti-ICE riots. Trump cited Title 10, a federal law that gives the president the authority to place National Guard troops under federal command if the U.S. faces a threat of invasion, if there is rebellion against federal authority, or if regular forces are not enough for the president to enforce federal laws.
Trump’s historic use of Title 10 and the legal battle to follow
However, declaring a state of emergency still wouldn’t be enough to “run” New York. Elizabeth Goitein, an expert on presidential power at the Brennan Center for Justice, told CNN: “There’s no emergency power that allows the president to take over a city.”
Has anything like this actually been done before?
No president has ever attempted to take over and “run” a city before, but there have been times when a commander in chief mobilized federal resources for certain purposes.
For example, President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the National Guard and sent members from the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1957. This was in response to Gov. Orval Faubus abusing his authority and using the National Guard, and later local police, to turn black students away amid integration efforts at Little Rock Central High School.
Eisenhower sent in the National Guard after Little Rock Mayor Woodrow Mann requested federal troops on Sept. 24.
Has Trump said this about any other city?
Aside from New York, Trump has also threatened to intervene in the District of Columbia. During the July 8 Cabinet meeting, he referenced perceived high crime and a possible deal between the district and the Washington Commanders in saying the federal government “could run D.C.”
“We don’t want crime in D.C,” Trump said. “We want the city to run well. We’re thinking about doing it, to be honest with you. We want a capital that’s run flawlessly, and it wouldn’t be hard for us to do it, and we’ve had a good relationship with the mayor [Muriel Bowser], and we’re testing it to see if it works.”
ANDREW CUOMO TO STAY IN RACE FOR NEW YORK MAYOR
Unlike New York, the District of Columbia is not a state — but a takeover of Washington would likely still be difficult. Congress would have to do away with the city’s “home rule,” which has been in effect since 1973 and allows the district to be run by a mayor and locally elected D.C. Council.
Under home rule, though, Congress does have a degree of oversight. Congress reviews new legislation proposed by the Council before signing it into law, the district’s budget, and the president’s appointment of judges for the district. Congress also has the power to revise or repeal any local laws.