Have law enforcement agencies investigated Zohran Mamdani for terrorism and when?

1. Claims in the public arena that demanded scrutiny — who said what and why!

Multiple claims circulated that Zohran Mamdani was under investigation or should be investigated for terrorism, driven by political opponents and conservative commentators who label him a “terrorist sympathizer.” Republican lawmakers, notably Rep. Andy Ogles, publicly urged the Justice Department to consider denaturalization over alleged past comments or lyrics, framing the issue as potential material support for terrorism and invoking sections of the U.S. Code related to revoking citizenship ^[2]. Conservative outlets and opinion pieces repeated and amplified those assertions, and some campaign ads weaponized Mamdani’s associations and statements. These public claims functioned as both a political attack and a call for legal action, but the public record in mainstream reporting and fact-check pieces does not corroborate that any terrorism investigation was opened by the DOJ, FBI, or Manhattan prosecutors as of the dates in the reviewed sources ^{[1] [4]}.

2. What independent reporting and fact-checks actually find — no evidence of a terrorism probe

Independent news outlets and fact-checkers examined the allegations and found no evidence in the public record that Mamdani was investigated for terrorism. A November 4, 2025 fact-check piece that addressed false Republican claims in the NYC mayoral race explicitly debunked accusations of terrorism-related investigations into Mamdani, noting that those claims were unsubstantiated and formed part of a broader pattern of misinformation during the campaign ^[1]. Major news organizations that covered Mamdani’s controversies reported on calls for scrutiny and on political fallout, but none cited an active terrorism probe by law enforcement agencies, and the Justice Department declined to comment publicly on correspondence such as Ogles’s letter, leaving no confirmation of a formal investigation ^[4].

3. Distinct legal actions: denaturalization calls and political pressure, not proven investigations

Separate from formal investigations, elected officials and advocacy groups pursued legal or administrative avenues against Mamdani. Rep. Ogles and others pushed for denaturalization or DOJ review, citing statutes that allow revocation of citizenship for material support of terrorism; those appeals represent political pressure and legal suggestion, not documented prosecutorial action ^[2]. The White House and DOJ’s public posture was limited—White House press statements urged investigation if claims were true—yet there is no public record of the DOJ initiating denaturalization or terrorism charges against Mamdani in the sources reviewed. Reporting also shows concern among civil-rights observers that denaturalization could be used as a political tool, underscoring how legal rhetoric has been deployed in a highly partisan context ^[4].

4. A separate criminal referral over campaign donations muddied the waters — different allegation, different authorities

In late October 2025 a conservative campaign finance watchdog, the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, filed criminal referrals with the Department of Justice and the Manhattan District Attorney alleging illegal foreign donations to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign, roughly $13,000 from addresses outside the U.S., some returned but about $7,190 remaining, prompting requests for probes under campaign finance laws ^{[5] [3]}. That matter involves potential violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act and New York election law and therefore engages federal and local prosecutors, but it is distinct from terrorism-related investigations; none of the filings asserted terrorism charges, and coverage of the referrals highlights compliance and accounting issues rather than national-security probes ^[6].

5. Why the distinction matters — political agendas, media framing, and the public record

The recurring theme across coverage is that political actors and outlets have conflated ideological stances, past associations, and campaign compliance issues with allegations of terrorism, often without producing evidence of formal law-enforcement action. Conservative and pro-Israel voices emphasized Mamdani’s policy positions and past appearances to argue for scrutiny, while fact-checkers and mainstream reporters pushed back, noting the absence of a terrorism probe in official public records ^{[1] [7]}. The campaign finance referral introduced a legitimate law-enforcement avenue that can and did prompt potential prosecutorial review, but conflating that with terrorism investigations misleads the public and serves partisan aims; readers should treat calls for denaturalization and sensational labels as political maneuvers unless and until prosecutors publicly confirm an investigation ^{[3] [4]}.

Bottom line: public records and reporting through early November 2025 document political pressure, denaturalization requests, and a campaign-finance criminal referral, but they do not document an actual law-enforcement terrorism investigation into Zohran Mamdani ^{[1] [3] [2]}.