Israel’s Foreign Ministry castigated New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Friday, Jan. 2, 2026, after he revoked a pair of executive orders signed by former Mayor Eric Adams that supported Israel, including one that adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism and another that barred city agencies from boycotting or divesting from Israel.
“On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face,” the ministry wrote on X, calling the move “antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.”
What Mamdani revoked on day one
City Hall said the incoming administration nullified all executive orders issued on or after Sept. 26, 2024, the date of Adams’ federal indictment, to ensure a fresh start.
That blanket revocation swept away the anti-boycott directive, which had prohibited city agencies from engaging in or endorsing boycotts of Israel, and the order adopting the IHRA definition of antisemitism for use across municipal operations.
Officials emphasized that Mamdani intends to review the post-indictment orders and reissue those he supports. Another rescinded directive had instructed the NYPD to enhance enforcement around houses of worship by establishing protest-free buffer zones near churches, synagogues and mosques. Adams’ office originally framed that step as a public-safety measure amid rising tensions around religious sites.
IHRA definition at center of dispute
The Adams-era order adopted a broad definition that included, among contemporary examples, demonizing Israel, holding it to double standards, or denying the Jewish people’s right to national self-determination.
Supporters argued that the framework provided clarity for city agencies confronting an uptick in antisemitic incidents, while civil-liberties advocates and some academics warned that municipal use of the definition could chill protected speech about Israeli government policies.
Critics of the IHRA-based approach said policy should focus on prosecutable threats, harassment and violence rather than speech standards that could entangle the city in viewpoint discrimination.
Adams’ critics maintained that the order risked infringing on First Amendment protections, particularly in contexts involving campus protests, public contracting and cultural programming.
Pushback from Israel and New York voices
The denunciation from Israel’s Foreign Ministry was followed by concerns from pro-Israel leaders in New York. Israel’s consul general Ofir Akunis said the revocations pose an immediate threat to Jewish communities’ safety and could lead to more violent antisemitic attacks. Brooklyn City Council member Inna Vernikov said the IHRA framework “protects from discrimination Jews who believe in self-determination” and offers needed clarity in policy and enforcement.
Supporters of the revocation countered that eliminating the anti-boycott order restores space for political advocacy and ensures the city does not penalize viewpoints.
Muslim and Arab American groups welcomed the move as a reset that separates municipal governance from foreign-policy litmus tests. City Hall underscored that the administration will continue to fund efforts to combat hate crimes, improve reporting and support victims regardless of the policy changes.
Boycotts, divestment and the First Amendment
The now-rescinded anti-boycott order had prohibited agencies from boycotting or divesting from Israel in the course of municipal operations.
Legal scholars have debated such provisions in other jurisdictions, noting tensions between anti-discrimination objectives and constitutional protections for political boycotts. Some courts have allowed contracting requirements that are neutral and narrowly tailored, while others have struck down restrictions that were deemed to target expressive conduct.
With the revocation, departments return to pre-order practices while guidance is rewritten. Procurement officials are expected to review standard contract language and align it with existing city human-rights law, which bars discrimination based on national origin and religion but does not impose viewpoint tests about foreign states.
Any reissued directives by Mamdani would be evaluated for compliance with constitutional case law and city code.
