Can mamdani actually arrest neteyahu

1. Mamdani’s promise: bold, public and repeated

Zohran Mamdani repeatedly told interviewers and outlets he would “arrest Benjamin Netanyahu” if the Israeli leader traveled to New York while Mamdani was mayor, saying the city should honor an ICC arrest warrant and that he would direct city law enforcement accordingly ^{[1] [7] [8]}. Reporting across The New York Times, Time and other outlets documents the pledge as a central and intentional campaign message designed to signal Mamdani’s stance on international law and the Gaza war ^{[4] [9] [8]}.

2. The ICC warrant is the basis — but the U.S. is not bound by it

Mamdani anchors his promise to the November 2024 ICC arrest warrant for Netanyahu, a fact widely reported; however, the United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute and therefore the ICC lacks jurisdictional authority inside the U.S. absent other mechanisms ^{[9] [2]}. Multiple outlets note that the ICC depends on member states to enforce warrants, something that does not directly translate to U.S. domestic enforcement ^{[5] [2]}.

3. Federal supremacy and foreign-affairs prerogatives create major legal barriers

Legal experts cited by news organizations explain that U.S. constitutional law vests primary authority over foreign affairs in the federal government, and courts have upheld federal primacy in this area — meaning a city-level attempt to execute an international arrest warrant would likely provoke federal intervention and legal challenge ^{[2] [3] [5]}. Analysts also point to executive-branch actions last year — including sanctions and other measures tied to the ICC matter — as evidence the federal government could move to block or reverse any local enforcement effort ^{[2] [6]}.

4. NYPD, mayoral authority and the practical chain of command

A mayor does not personally make arrests; the mayor relies on the NYPD and its legal officers to act on orders. Experts note that an arrest order from the mayor would be routed through the NYPD’s legal chain (for example to the deputy commissioner for legal matters), and police would assess legality — but the ultimate clash would be between city action and federal supremacy if the federal government objected ^{[5] [8]}.

5. Political theater, invitations and Republican responses

Mamdani’s pledge has provoked political counters: Republican City Council members and national politicians have invited Netanyahu to New York as a challenge and proposed federal legislation to block such a local move, framing the pledge as symbolic posturing or even an overreach ^{[10] [11]}. Coverage shows the promise functions as both political signaling to constituencies and a provocation that opponents have used to mobilize legal and legislative responses ^{[12] [11]}.

6. What experts and outlets consistently conclude: unlikely to succeed

Mainstream outlets and legal commentators uniformly describe the pledge as “unlikely,” “unenforceable,” or “oversteps” mayoral power, even as they note the moral and symbolic impact of Mamdani’s stance ^{[6] [5] [2]}. Reporting makes clear that while New York can express policy positions and refuse municipal hospitality, a forcible arrest of a foreign head of government on U.S. soil would almost certainly trigger federal action and legal hurdles ^{[4] [3]}.

7. Disagreements and political framing to watch

While legal analysts stress practical impossibility, Mamdani and supporters frame the pledge as a principled stand for international law; critics portray it as inflammatory or antisemitic and have pushed countermeasures in Congress and local politics ^{[1] [11] [13]}. Readers should note these competing motives: Mamdani’s stated human-rights framing and opponents’ framing as political theater or a security risk ^{[8] [11]}.

8. Bottom line and what reporting does not say

Available reporting shows Mamdani made the promise and explains multiple legal and political reasons why an actual arrest on U.S. soil is unlikely, including non-membership in the ICC, federal supremacy in foreign affairs, and prior executive actions tied to the ICC ^{[2] [5] [6]}. Available sources do not mention a concrete legal pathway or precedent by which a U.S. city successfully arrested and delivered a sitting foreign leader to the ICC (not found in current reporting).