(JTA) — The man who is likely to be New York City’s top finance watchdog under Zohran Mamdani — assuming they both win their races on Tuesday — has said he does not believe Mamdani could divest the city’s pension funds of their investments in Israel.

“Just doesn’t have the votes for that,” Mark Levine, the likely next comptroller, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in September.

But in fact, Mamdani would be able to stack the boards of two of the city’s five pension funds such that divestment from Israel could be on the table, according to a JTA analysis — and some of Mamdani’s supporters say they are optimistic.

“We have hope in a Mamdani administration,” said Leah Plasse, a school-based social worker who has been lobbying for two years for the Teachers’ Retirement System to divest from Israeli assets.

As the election draws close and Mamdani maintains his lead in the polls, Jewish New Yorkers are wondering about how a mayor who is a longstanding supporter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel could enact his vision in New York City. 

Mamdani has stated his intention not to invest city funds in Israel bonds, in keeping with the current comptroller’s decision not to reinvest when $39 million in bonds matured in 2023. 

But the city’s pension funds hold Israel investments beyond Israel bonds, which are issued by the Israeli government. The BDS movement calls for divesting from “all Israeli and international companies that sustain Israeli apartheid” — expanding targets to include most Israeli companies as well as non-Israeli companies that do business with the Israeli government. 

The Teachers’ Retirement System’s Israeli investments include military technology companies — which Plasse and the group NYC Educators for Palestine have honed in on — as well as a variety of businesses like energy companies, food manufacturers and fuel companies.

Altogether, the city’s five public pension funds contain approximately $315 million in Israeli assets, according to the comptroller’s office. Mamdani has not indicated an intention to push for full divestment, but he also has not denied the possibility when asked.

Asked about doing so in a JTA questionnaire last week, Mamdani responded, “I support the approach of the current comptroller, Brad Lander, to end the practice of purchasing Israel bonds in our pension funds, which we do not do for any other nation.” He also did not specifically respond to part of that question which asked how else he might advance the cause of BDS as mayor. 

What’s clear is that if Mamdani chose to make divestment a priority, pathways exist within the city’s pension fund management where headway could be possible.

For each of the city’s five pension funds to make any investment decisions, its board of trustees must vote in favor. Those boards vary in size, but typically consist of the comptroller, an appointee by the mayor and a number of labor representatives. Recommendations are made to those boards by the comptroller’s in-house Bureau of Asset Management.

Levine emphasized that a mayor could not “singlehandedly” overrule the comptroller’s recommendations to divest from Israel. But on boards where the mayor has more influence over the makeup of the trustees, the mayor could do so with the help of his or her appointees.

The Board of Education Retirement System, for example, has a 28-person board of trustees — a 15-person majority of whom are appointed by the mayor. Of those 15 mayoral appointees, one is the schools chancellor, one is an independent appointee, and the other 13 are the mayoral appointees on the city’s Panel for Educational Policy. (Mamdani has said he wants to reduce the influence of the mayor on the PEP.) The number of votes required to pass a resolution in the BERS is 15, though that figure must include one of the board’s two employee-elected members.

The board of the Teachers’ Retirement System, meanwhile, consists of seven members, and requires four votes to pass a resolution. Three of the members are mayoral appointees, one represents the city comptroller, and the other three are elected by the teachers on staggered three-year terms. 

The three teacher members on the board now are all drawn from the teachers union’s leadership caucus. The union, the United Federation of Teachers, endorsed Mamdani.

The other three pension funds — for police, firefighters and city employees — are less susceptible to mayoral influence because the mayor appoints a smaller proportion of members.

While the movement to boycott Israel has called for divestment since 2005, advocacy has ramped up in many places in the last two years during the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. In New York City, pro-Palestinian advocacy groups have gained little traction under an Eric Adams mayoral administration that is not sympathetic to their activism. 

In fact, the Teachers’ Retirement System board has been resistant to advocacy for divestment, according to Plasse, who noted that the board “voted to close the public comment period after 1.5 years of us coming to speak about divesting our pension.” 

Plasse said she was told this change was made for the sake of consistency, as no other pension funds’ board meetings include public comment periods. But she said it felt “quite clear” the real reasoning was to stifle her and her group’s “continued advocacy.”

Indeed, groups such as NYC Educators for Palestine and Workers for Palestine have regularly sent representatives to the public meetings of the pension boards. In public comments, the activists have pointed to examples like the city’s divestment from South African businesses in the 1980s, and more recently, the funds’ unilateral decision to divest from Russian securities in 2022, to show a precedent.

“And just on a personal note, before the holidays, as a Jew, before Hanukkah begins, I truly believe in tikkun olam, which is the repairing of the world,” Plasse said in the public comment period of a December 2024 board meeting of the Teachers’ Retirement System, according to meeting minutes. “We are funding genocide. That is against my faith.”

Any effort to divest from Israel would likely butt up against Levine, who is expected to win the race for comptroller. Levine, who is Jewish, endorsed Mamdani but has said he wants the city to resume investing in Israel bonds. NYC Educators for Palestine joined the anti-Zionist group Jewish Voice for Peace outside Levine’s office last week for a protest they named “Break the Bonds,” calling his intention to invest in Israel bonds one that puts “deadly politics over the interests of working New Yorkers.”

Levine, however, says he isn’t motivated by pro-Israel sentiment. The investments, he notes, have always been sound for the city. (Levine’s campaign did not respond to requests for a follow-up interview.)

That means the issue of Israeli investments — which, according to Levine, are a sturdy piece of an investment portfolio that serves more than 750,000 New Yorkers — could bring some of Mamdani’s deeply held values into conflict. In response to JTA’s question on divestment, he emphasized the central promises of his campaign. 

“My priority as mayor will be to deliver on the affordability agenda I ran on: freezing the rent, universal childcare, and fast and free buses,” Mamdani answered. “That will always be the core of my administration.”

And advocates for divestment say they won’t stop pushing the case before the pension boards. At October’s Teachers’ Retirement System board meeting, Plasse handed out a written statement calling for an investment analysis and declaring that her group would be undeterred by the board’s repeated denials. 

“I am more than open to meet with anyone about anything that has been discussed here today,” the statement read. “But please know, we are only becoming more embolden [sic] to demand this change. This is our money and the time will come.”

The post 2 of NYC’s 5 public pension funds are vulnerable to a mayor-backed Israel divestment push appeared first on The Forward.

The decision by Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts to release a video statement on social media opposing efforts to rebuke those who choose to platform Nick Fuentes, the neo-Nazi podcaster, has prompted the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) to call for his resignation in a statement released on Monday, as the longstanding conservative think tank faces pressure broadly over the choice to stand with controversial commentator Tucker Carlson.

ZOA National President Morton Klein said that his organization was outraged by the video released on Thursday, and that Roberts was effectively “defending, whitewashing, and allying the Heritage Foundation and himself with Jew-hating Israel-basher Tucker Carlson.”

“Roberts horrifyingly emphasized that Carlson ‘will always be a close friend of the Heritage Foundation‘ right after Carlson fawningly interviewed neo-Nazi, Holocaust denier, racist Nick Fuentes,” Klein added. “Dr. Roberts, the issue is not opposing criticizing Israel – of course that’s fully acceptable, just as criticizing France, Ireland, or the US is acceptable. What’s not acceptable is lying about Israel committing genocide, etc., or rejecting Israel’s right to exist.”

Klein continued, “Sickeningly, Roberts also proclaimed that neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes should not be ‘canceled.’ Refusing to give platforms to neo-Nazis is not ‘cancel’ culture; it is basic morality. Roberts also outrageously called those who rightly oppose Carlson a ‘venomous coalition’ and a ‘globalist class’ of ‘bad actors who serve someone else’s agenda’ (the ‘double loyalty’ libel); falsely accused all who oppose Carlson of ‘slander’; and attempted to sow division between America and Israel.”

Carlson’s Oct. 27 interview with Fuentes released on X contained a variety of antisemitic statements. Fuentes described “organized Jewry” as a “big challenge” to unifying the country and stated his opposition to “these Zionist Jews.” He said he was “always an admirer” of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.

In the discussion, Carlson, who did not challenge Fuentes on his most controversial comments, stated that “one of the reasons I’m mad about Gaza is because the Israeli position is, everyone who lives in Gaza is a terrorist because of how they were born … That’s not a Western view. That’s an Eastern view. That’s non-Christian. That’s totally incompatible with Christianity and Western civilization.”

Carlson also said he opposed “Christian Zionism” and came under fire for giving Fuentes a friendly platform to espouse his views.

While the ZOA noted that Roberts wrote a follow-up post on X condemning Fuentes’ neo-Nazism and neo-Stalinism, the group lamented how “Roberts still failed to retract [his] support of Carlson despite Carlson’s long list of antisemitic and anti-Israel pronouncements and Carlson’s platforming of Jew-haters such as Fuentes. Unless Kevin Roberts retracts and apologizes for his praise for Jew-hating Israel-basher Tucker Carlson, who legitimizes and mainstreams antisemites like Nick Fuentes, and publicly condemns and ends Heritage Foundation’s relationship with Tucker Carlson, Roberts is not fit to continue as Heritage Foundation’s president.”

ZOA Director of Government Relations Dan Pollak defended the US-Israel relationship and expressed his offense at the Heritage head’s positions.

“I was personally deeply offended by Roberts’ comments implying that pro-Israel conservatives place Israel’s needs over those of the USA,” Pollak said. “I served my country as an officer in the US Navy and have every right to promote policies I believe in without being accused of inappropriate loyalty to another country. It is obvious that supporting the American-Israeli relationship is in the national interest of both countries.”

Pollak also noted the double standard of Carlson and others harshly accusing Israel and its supporters of pushing the US to support the Jewish state without mentioning Qatar, which has spent billions of dollars to influence US policy making and public opinion in Doha’s favor.

“Roberts’ claim that a ‘globalist class’ is pushing pro-Israel policies on the US ignores that the real ‘globalist’ is Qatar,” he said. “Qatar is buying influence in Washington and runs the anti-American Al-Jazeera. Qatar seems to have extraordinary influence with Tucker Carlson. Heritage Foundation’s president is simply wrong to malign the pro-Israel community. It is also bizarre that Roberts defended Tucker Carlson in the name of Christianity, when Carlson has called all Christian Zionists ‘heretics.’ Thank God we have courageous Christians in office, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who has robustly criticized Roberts’ remarks.”

Cruz lambasted Carlson, Fuentes, and Roberts while calling out a rise in right-wing antisemitism during remarks at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual summit on Thursday night.

“Now is a time for choosing. Now is a time for courage,” Cruz said to the audience in Las Vegas, Nevada. “If you sit there and nod adoringly as someone tells you that Winston Churchill was the villain of World War II, if you sit there and nod as someone tells you there’s a very good argument that America should’ve intervened on behalf of Nazi Germany in World War II, if you sit there with someone that says that Adolph Hitler was very, very cool, and that their mission is to combat and defeat global Jewry, then you are a coward.”

Daily Wire podcast host Ben Shapiro, one of the most prominent Jewish conservatives in the US, said on Monday that Carlson “has become the most virulent super spreader of vile ideas in America.”

Shapiro devoted his entire Monday broadcast to the Fuentes-Carlson controversy.

“Tucker Carlson acts as an ideological launderer for other people’s evils,” Shapiro said. “Tucker Carlson says many inflammatory things, always buying back just enough of it to appear as though he’s not saying what he’s clearly saying. He’s a master of gaslighting. Tucker Carlson, for example, would never say out loud what Nick Fuentes does. He wouldn’t say the things many of his guests say. And so instead, he acts as an ideological wanderer.”

At last week’s Republican Jewish Coalition event, US Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) called Carlson “the most dangerous antisemite in America.”

“He [Carlson] has chosen to take on the mantle of leader of a modern-day Hitler youth, to broadcast and feature those who celebrate the Nazis, those who call for the extermination of Israel, to defend Hamas, to even criticize President Trump for stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions,” Fine said.

“Friends, make no mistake. Tucker is not MAGA,” he added, referring to the Donald Trump-led Make America Great Again movement. Fine also announced he would not allow Heritage Foundation staffers in his office and urged others to institute a similar policy.

On Sunday, Mark Goldfeder, CEO of the National Jewish Advocacy Center and an Orthodox rabbi, posted a letter of resignation on X, explaining his decision to step down from the Heritage Foundation’s National Task Force to Combat Antisemitism.

The National Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, a project of @Heritage, has done valuable work. But free speech includes the right to associate—and not to.
I cannot serve under someone who thinks Nazis are worth debating. Here is my resignation letter: pic.twitter.com/ccVHMdlDbO

— Mark Goldfeder (@MarkGoldfeder) November 2, 2025

“I cannot serve under someone who thinks Nazis are worth debating,” Goldfeder wrote. “Elevating him and then attacking those who object as somehow un-American or disloyal in a video replete with antisemitic tropes and dog whistles, no less, is not the protection of free speech. It is a moral collapse disguised as courage.”

Goldfeder called it “especially painful that Heritage, an institution with a historic role in shaping conservative policy, would choose this moment to blur the line between worthwhile debate and the normalization of hate.”

According to journalist Eli Lake at The Free Press, Roberts’ video “has sparked a near-insurrection inside his think tank.” Lake added that one anonymous, conservative donor he had spoken to said they were “reconsidering their annual gift to Heritage in light of Roberts’ defense of Carlson.”

(JTA) — In May 2023, a member of the New York State Assembly introduced a bill aimed at blocking nonprofits from funding Israeli settlements in the West Bank. It was swiftly rebuked by his colleagues and never came to a vote.

That bill was called “Not on our dime!: Ending New York funding of Israeli settler violence act,” and the assemblymember was democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani. Now, Mamdani is an emblem of shifting sentiments against Israel — among New Yorkers and Americans nationwide — as he verges on being elected the mayor of New York City.

While “Not On Our Dime” had a short run in Albany, its specter has loomed large over the mayor’s race, particularly for Jewish New Yorkers who are wary of Mamdani because of his attitudes about Israel. Over 1,150 rabbis nationwide, including hundreds in New York City, have signed a letter warning that Jews would be stripped of their “safety and dignity” if anti-Zionism is “normalized” in the city’s halls of power.

Mamdani told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in a questionnaire last week that he would prioritize his local affordability agenda as mayor. But he also did not reject the idea of enacting “Not On Our Dime”-style legislation in New York City.

“Charities and nonprofits that receive a taxpayer subsidy should not support the violation of international law, and that’s what the right-wing Israeli settlement project is doing,” said Mamdani. “An effort that goes against the stated foreign policy of our own government, going back several decades.”

Here is what “Not On Our Dime” actually said, what its supporters and critics argued, and what its implications could be for New York City under Mamdani.

What the legislation said

“Not On Our Dime” proposed amending the state’s nonprofit law to “prohibit not-for-profit corporations from engaging in unauthorized support of Israeli settlement activity.” Mamdani said it would stop the flow of about $60 million a year from New York-based charities to settlements deemed illegal under international law.

The bill defined “unauthorized support for Israeli settlement activity” as “aiding and abetting” any violation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions by Israel or its citizens. According to the bill, this included the illegal transfer of Israelis into “occupied territory” (defined as the West Bank and East Jerusalem), acts of violence against people living in occupied territory, forced eviction and the seizure or destruction of Palestinian land or property. Mamdani did not tell JTA whether he believed that “unauthorized support” should extend to humanitarian aid for Israelis in the relevant areas.

https://www.instagram.com/p/C7j8JlqOioQ/?img_index=3&igsh=MWx3OWZjZ281eDV0eg%3D%3D

The bill said nonprofits that spent at least $1 million in violation could be sued, fined by the state attorney general and lose their tax-exempt status. Palestinians and others who said they were harmed by a violation would also be allowed to sue the nonprofits.

“Not On Our Dime” was co-sponsored by four other democratic socialists in the Assembly — Sarahana Shrestha, Phara Souffrant Forrest, Marcela Mitaynes and Emily Gallagher — along with the New York chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. It emerged from a campaign from left-leaning nonprofits such as the Center for Constitutional Rights, the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, the Adalah Justice Project and Jewish Voice for Peace.

The groups said on a website for the campaign that they believed nonprofits supporting Israeli settlements should be shut down. “This pioneering legislation makes explicit what is implicit–that a certain class of activities are fundamentally inconsistent with a charitable purpose, and should therefore subject an organization to dissolution,” the website said.

Mamdani told the Jewish Press, an Orthodox newspaper in New York, that he had met with those groups before proposing the legislation, which was accompanied by a state Senate version sponsored by DSA member Jabari Brisport. He also said he viewed the legislation as unlikely to prevail — but crucial to raising awareness about an important issue.

“I believe the attorney general has the jurisdiction now to pursue measures of accountability with regards to these organizations. The likelihood of that is minimal and I think that’s why there is the necessity for this legislation,” he told the newspaper at the time. “I’m under no illusion about the long journey that this legislation has to travel on. I do believe it is a critical first step to even inform New Yorkers.”

There was no precedent for a law that sought to block U.S. charities from funding Israeli settlements. Several states, including New York, have passed measures that took an opposite stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by punishing organizations that boycotted Israel.

Andrew Cuomo, Mamdani’s closest competitor in the mayoral race who is running as an independent, enacted one of these policies as the governor of New York. In 2016, he passed an executive order that banned state agencies from investing in companies and organizations that promoted or engaged in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel.

Mamdani has long supported that movement, which calls for government measures to pressure Israel into withdrawing from the West Bank and granting full equality to Palestinians.

What happened when it was introduced

The legislation sparked a surge of energy among pro-Palestinian activists, with over 500 people marching in support in New York City. In Albany, Mamdani announced the bill together with pro-Palestinian activists including Rosalind Petchesky, a retired political scientist who would later feature prominently in his mayoral campaign.

Petchesky, a member of Jewish Voice for Peace, told the press that “Jews are not a monolith.” She added, “We do not all support the state of Israel, we are not all Zionists, many take the position of supporting Palestinians and Palestinian human rights.”

But in the state government, backlash was quick. Democratic Assemblymembers Nily Rozic and Daniel Rosenthal — who are both Jewish, with Rosenthal since leaving for a position at UJA-Federation of New York — denounced “Not On Our Dime” in an open letter signed by 25 lawmakers. They said the bill was “a ploy to demonize Jewish charities with connections to Israel” that would “further sow divisions within the Democratic Party.”

Their letter did not mention Israeli settlements, but said that “Not On Our Dime” sought to attack Jewish groups with “missions from feeding the poor to providing emergency medical care for victims of terrorism to clothing orphans.”

Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie told the Forward the bill was a “non-starter,” and it did not advance. (Two years later, Heastie endorsed Mamdani for mayor in September.)

Meanwhile, all 48 Assembly Republicans denounced the bill as “utterly vicious” in their own joint letter. “This bill seeks to penalize non-profit entities that have any affiliation with the state of Israel and is effectively an attack on Jews and Israel,” they wrote. “As Americans, we find this bill to be not only discriminatory but also deeply anti-Semitic.”

What the bill’s advocates said

Supporters of the legislation said it would cut off a major source of funding for organizations that push Palestinians out of their homes and support violent extremists. Between 2009 and 2013, private donors sent over $220 million to West Bank settlements through about 50 tax-exempt nonprofits, according to a 2015 investigation by Haaretz.

“Aiding and abetting war crimes is not charitable, period,” said Vince Warren, director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which backed the bill, in 2023. “This bill goes a long way toward ensuring that New York is not inadvertently subsidizing war crimes, but rather creating paths for accountability.”

Mamdani and other advocates rejected the idea that the bill would constrain appropriate charitable work. “Organizations, including Jewish organizations that feed the poor, provide emergency medical care and clothe orphans take up noble causes for which New York state should provide the benefits of charitable status,” he told the Jewish Press at the time. “This is why the bill does not apply to such groups. The rhetorical tactics employed by this letter to suggest otherwise is an attempt to avoid the issue at hand: settlements.”

BREAKING: Historic legislation was just introduced to block the flow of money from the US to Israeli settler violence against Palestinians. pic.twitter.com/D0FN6Q3jL7

— Jewish Voice for Peace (@jvplive) May 17, 2023

Mamdani and his co-sponsors relaunched “Not On Our Dime” in May 2024 as Israel and Hamas battled in Gaza, saying they would revise the bill to prohibit “aiding and abetting” Israeli resettlement of Gaza and “unauthorized support” for Israeli military actions that broke international law. Mamdani said he believed the bill had a better chance then, as it reflected “newfound consciousness in our country with regards to the urgency of Palestinian human rights.”

In fact, “Not On Our Dime” had no better prospects in Albany — but it gained traction on the national stage. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the progressive star who represents the Bronx and Queens but rarely steps into state politics, gave the bill her endorsement.

“It is more important now than ever to hold the Netanyahu government accountable for endorsing and, in fact, supporting some of this settler violence that prevents a lasting peace,” said Ocasio-Cortez at the time. Her backing, a year before she would endorse Mamdani for mayor, signaled the rising crescendo of a left wing animated by criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

What the bill’s critics said

Critics said the bill would punish Jewish organizations that provide a range of humanitarian services internationally, including to people living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Sara Forman, who leads the pro-Israel group New York Solidarity Network, called it “antisemitic and unconstitutional state-level nonsensical legislation.”

“This bogus bill, which is extremely vague, would force Jewish charities to quadruple check every penny and every cause related to Israel, tie up their time, cast suspicion on all their work, and stifle critical dollars dedicated to meaningful causes in Israel and the United States, from education to anti-poverty efforts,” Forman said in 2024.

Even some people who partly share Mamdani’s critique of the settlement movement and the Israeli government said the bill went too far.

Rabbi Jill Jacobs, head of the rabbinic human rights organization T’ruah, has herself attempted to block U.S. funding to the most violent Israeli settler groups. Since 2016, T’ruah has filed complaints with the IRS about nonprofits like the Central Fund of Israel, which funnels millions in tax-exempt donations to Israeli groups that fund militant Jewish supremacists. T’ruah’s reasoning was that leaders of these extremist organizations have been indicted or convicted of terrorism in Israel, and U.S. law prohibits sending tax-exempt donations to terrorist groups.

Mamdani specifically mentioned the Manhattan-based Central Fund of Israel during his 2023 press circuit for “Not On Our Dime.” But Jacobs opposed the bill, even as her own efforts failed to stop the flow of money to extremist groups. She said it was too broad, allowing for the possibility of targeting nonprofits beyond terrorists and groups directly involved in building settlements.

“Because of the vagueness of the language, it could potentially be construed to relate to any nonprofit that is putting the baseline of $1 million into settlements,” Jacobs said in an interview. “It could include a group that’s doing support for victims of terror, and a large percentage of them might be living over the Green Line. It could be construed to include American Friends of Hebrew University, because that’s in East Jerusalem.”

In criticizing the legislation, Jacobs referenced the Talmudic idiom “tafasta meruba lo tafasta” — or, “if you grasped too much, you did not grasp anything.”

What “Not On Our Dime” means for a Mayor Mamdani

New York City mayors have long endeavored to show support for Israel, dating back even before it became a state in 1948. In 1923, Mayor John Hylan called on New Yorkers to contribute “generous support” to a fund for building a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Then as now, the city had the largest Jewish population in the world.

But this year, the mayor’s race overlapped with a war that sent opinions of Israel in the United States plunging to new lows, with images of dying Palestinian children and destruction spreading across social media and protesters, including many American Jews and New Yorkers, rallying against Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

Mamdani surged in that context, winning the Democratic mayoral nomination and rocketing to fame at the same time as Israel drew its sharpest and most widespread criticism. The timing was right for Mamdani, who is 34 and formed his political identity as a young man around a cause that had never before found a champion in Gracie Mansion: Palestinian rights and independence.

He has pledged to take some actions locally to advance those views, including arresting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if the Israeli leader sets foot in New York City, not investing the city’s pension funds in Israel bonds and dismantling a New York-Israel economic cooperation initiative.

Mamdani has not said he would propose legislation comparable to “Not On Our Dime” as mayor. Still, some New Yorkers concerned about his stances on Israel are asking if he would attempt a city-level version of the bill — and how that would affect their lives.

In August, a caller to WNYC’s “Brian Lehrer Show” asked whether such legislation would penalize their synagogue for donating to Jewish emergency response groups that operate globally, including in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. In an on-air interview, Lehrer relayed this question to Mamdani, who brushed off the concern.

Jacobs said that outcome would be unlikely under the legislation as it was written, given its $1 million threshold.

“I guess if there were a synagogue that was raising $1 million for a settlement, then if this bill had passed, maybe it would say that synagogue couldn’t do that. But I don’t know if that is a situation that actually exists,” she said.

Jeremy Cohan, a leader in the New York City chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, is part of the Jewish left that has strengthened Mamdani’s rise. In his own interview with Lehrer in October, Cohan articulated his understanding of “Not On Our Dime” and why he believed it would resonate with New York City voters.

“The ‘Not On Our Dime’ bill was designed to say, ‘Hey, if you’re committing violations of international law, if you’re funneling money to organizations that are committing violations of international law, that are aiming to dispossess people of their land illegally, that are complicit in war crimes, we are going to not subsidize that as New York State. New York State stands for something. We don’t stand for war crimes,’” he said.

“I do think that so much of the choice, or a decent part of the choice, facing New Yorkers is, do New Yorkers want a mayor who takes war crimes seriously, or do they want a mayor like Andrew Cuomo who defends war crimes and genocide,” Cohan continued. “I think they want a mayor who opposes war crimes and prioritizes their interests, which Zohran Mamdani will do.”

“Not On Our Dime” shows Mamdani is a politician with a track record of taking action on his beliefs, whether or not he believes he will quickly effect change. And in his victory speech after the Democratic primary, he identified himself as one of “millions of New Yorkers who have strong feelings about what happens overseas.”

He acknowledged that many in the city disagreed with his ideas and said he would seek to understand their perspectives. But in a sign of how he would hold to his views of Israel and Palestine as the mayor of New York City, he said, “I will not abandon my beliefs or my commitments grounded in a demand for equality, for humanity, for all those who walk this earth.”

The post What to know about ‘Not On Our Dime,’ Zohran Mamdani’s bill targeting donations to Israeli settlements appeared first on The Forward.