Mamdani Names NYC Legal Advisory Panel With No Jewish Representatives

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveiled the list of members of the city’s advisory committee on legal matters, and it does not include a representative of Jewish background. According to a Wednesday report in The New York Times, Jewish bar associations are outraged and argue that Mamdani ignored the fact that Jews make up roughly 10 percent of the city’s population and a significant part of the local legal community.

The 18-member committee will be chaired by attorney Ali Najmi, described as Mamdani’s close friend and ally, who was a key figure in Mamdani’s election as mayor. Presenting the committee’s members, Mamdani said that "this is a composition that faithfully reflects the city’s cosmopolitan population."

According to the report, Elizabeth Forspan, president of the Brandeis Association in Queens, sent Mamdani a sharply worded letter of protest, also signed by leaders of the Manhattan Jewish Lawyers Guild and parallel organizations from the Bronx and Brooklyn. "Not a single Jewish attorney, former judge, or legal professional was appointed to the committee that your administration described as reflecting New York."

For example, the report noted the rejection of John Leventhal, a retired judge who had been recommended to serve on the committee. The mayor’s office rejected his candidacy on the grounds that he had previously represented Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s partner, in an appeal after she was criminally charged.

Leventhal, for his part, responded to The New York Times and made clear that legal representation for every defendant is a fundamental right. "There should be a Jewish person on the mayor’s committee, and I can only hope the absence is not intentional." Various figures reacted to the report on social media, claiming that Mamdani’s decision was "outright antisemitism."

The mayor’s spokesperson, Joe Calvello, rejected the allegations of exclusion. He stressed that Mamdani has previously appointed Jewish judges, adding that any suggestion that the decisions were driven by religious considerations is "completely false."