New Yorkers woke on January 1, 2026 to find Zohran Mamdani sworn in as the city’s 112th mayor, proudly declaring himself a democratic socialist and promising to reshape how the city handles housing and tenant protections. That kind of political reorientation ought to have been debated in daylight, not rammed through as inauguration-day theater.
On day one the Mamdani administration signed executive orders to “revitalize” the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants and created new task forces—LIFT and SPEED—meant to push housing projects onto city-owned land and speed up construction. The mayor even named Cea Weaver, a well-known tenant organizer, to run the reinvigorated tenants’ office, signaling the administration’s priorities from the jump.
The administration also tapped Dina Levy as Housing Commissioner and announced “Rental Ripoff” hearings across the five boroughs to air tenants’ grievances and shape policy responses. On its face, hearing from citizens is fine; the problem is when hearings are just a pretext for regulatory overreach and ideological rent-seeking that crushes property rights.
Conservative Americans should pay attention to the record: Cea Weaver’s history of radical tweets and calls to decommodify housing have provoked intense pushback, with critics warning her past rhetoric endorses seizing private property and devaluing homeownership. This isn’t academic; it matters when those who want to remake the housing market sit in City Hall and write the rules.
On conservative airwaves Rob Schmitt slammed the early moves of the Mamdani team, calling out what he called “a whole cadre of idiots” in the administration and warning ordinary New Yorkers that political leaders are flirting with schemes that would take control of housing out of private hands. That blunt assessment resonates because hardworking families across America know the real cost of losing control over their homes and livelihoods.
Make no mistake: LIFT’s explicit mission to leverage city-owned land for development and the administration’s mission to “protect tenants” are not neutral acts—they are the opening salvos in a fight over who owns America’s neighborhoods. If the state begins choosing who owns what and deciding how much your property is “worth,” we are sliding toward the very model of centralized control conservatives have warned about for decades.
Patriots don’t sit quietly while governments nibble away at private property and personal liberty. Show up at the hearings, demand clear guarantees for property owners, and make your voice heard at the ballot box; we will not let a mayoral administration turn the city into a proving ground for national socialism without a fight.

