NEW YORK: New York City Democrats will decide Tuesday whether to reboot Andrew Cuomo’s political career, elevate liberal upstart Zohran Mamdani, or turn to a crowded field of lesser-known but maybe less-polarizing candidates in the party’s mayoral primary.
Their choice could say something about what kind of leader Democrats are looking for during President Donald Trump’s second term.
The vote takes place about four years after Cuomo, 67, resigned as governor following a sexual harassment scandal. Yet he has been the favorite throughout the race, with his deep experience, nearly universal name recognition, strong political connections and juggernaut fundraising apparatus.
The party’s progressive wing, meanwhile, has coalesced behind Mamdani, 33, a self-described democratic socialist. A relatively unknown state legislator when the contest began, Mamdani gained momentum by running a sharp campaign laser-focused on the city’s high cost of living and secured endorsements from two of the country’s foremost progressives, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders.
As results from early and mail-in voting began to roll in Tuesday, they showed a majority of voters had made Mamdani or Cuomo their top choice, with the rest of the field trailing.
The candidates made a final push out in the city earlier in the day, sweating it out with voters on a sizzling summer day in which temperatures reached the triple digits. While initial returns were being released after the polls closed at 9 p.m. Tuesday, a winner might not emerge for a week because of the city’s ranked choice voting system, which allows voters to list up to five candidates in order of preference. If a candidate is the first choice of a majority of voters, they win outright. If no candidate reaches that threshold, the tabulation of the rankings wouldn’t begin until July 1.
The primary winner will go on to face incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat who decided to run as an independent amid a public uproar over his indictment on corruption charges and the subsequent abandonment of the case by Trump’s Justice Department. Republican Curtis Sliwa, the founder of the Guardian Angels, will be on the ballot in the fall’s general election. There is also a possibility that Cuomo runs on the November ballot as an independent candidate if he loses the primary.
The mayoral primary’s two leading candidates — one a fresh-faced progressive and the other an older moderate — could be stand-ins for the larger Democratic Party’s ideological divide, though Cuomo’s scandal-scarred past adds a unique tinge to the narrative.
The rest of the pack has struggled to gain recognition in a race where nearly every candidate has cast themselves as the person best positioned to challenge Trump’s Republican agenda.
Comptroller Brad Lander, a liberal city government stalwart, made a splash last week when he was arrested after linking arms with a man federal agents were trying to detain at an immigration court in Manhattan. It was unclear if that episode was enough to jump-start a campaign that had been failing to pick up speed behind Lander.
Among the other candidates are City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams, state Sen. Zellnor Myrie, hedge fund executive Whitney Tilson and former city Comptroller Scott Stringer.
Mamdani’s energetic run has been hard not to notice.
His army of young canvassers relentlessly knocked on doors throughout the city seeking support. Posters of his grinning mug were up on shop windows. You couldn’t get on social media without seeing one of his well-produced videos pitching his vision — free buses, free child care, new apartments, a higher minimum wage and more, paid for by new taxes on rich people. He would be the city’s first Indian American and first Muslim mayor.
That youthful energy was apparent Tuesday evening, as both cautiously optimistic canvassers and ecstatic supporters lined the streets of Central Brooklyn, creating a party-like atmosphere that spread from poll sites into the surrounding neighborhoods.
Outside his family’s Caribbean apothecary, Amani Kojo, a 23-year-old first-time voter, passed out iced tea to Mamdani canvassers, encouraging them to stay hydrated.
“It’s 100 degrees outside and it’s a vibe. New York City feels alive again,” Kojo said, raising a pile of Mamdani pamphlets. “It feels very electric seeing all the people around, the flyers, all the posts on my Instagram all day.”
Cuomo and some other Democrats have cast Mamdani as unqualified. They say he doesn’t have the management chops to wrangle the city’s sprawling bureaucracy or handle crises. Critics have also taken aim at Mamdani’s support for Palestinian human rights.
In response, Mamdani has slammed Cuomo over his sexual harassment scandal and his handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
In one heated debate exchange, Cuomo rattled off a long list of what he saw as Mamdani’s managerial shortcomings, arguing that his opponent, who has been in the state Assembly since 2021, has never dealt with Congress or unions and never overseen an infrastructure project. He added that Mamdani couldn’t be relied upon to go toe-to-toe with Trump.
Mamdani had a counter ready.
“To Mr. Cuomo, I have never had to resign in disgrace,” he said.
Cuomo resigned in 2021 after a report commissioned by the state attorney general concluded that he had sexually harassed at least 11 women. He has always maintained that he didn’t intentionally harass the women, saying he had simply fallen behind what was considered appropriate workplace conduct.
During the campaign, he has become more aggressive in defending himself, framing the situation as a political hit job orchestrated by his enemies.
The fresh scandal at City Hall involving Mayor Eric Adams, though, gave Cuomo a path to end his exile.

BOSTON: Attorneys general from more than 20 states and Washington, D.C. filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging billions of dollars in funding cuts made by the Trump administration that would fund everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research.
The lawsuit filed in Boston is asking a judge to limit the Trump administration from relying on an obscure clause in the federal regulation to cut grants that don’t align with its priorities. Since January, the lawsuit argues that the administration has used that clause to cancel entire programs and thousands of grants that had been previously awarded to states and grantees.
“Defendants’ decision to invoke the Clause to terminate grants based on changed agency priorities is unlawful several times over,” the plaintiffs argued. “The rulemaking history of the Clause makes plain that the (Office of Management and Budget) intended for the Clause to permit terminations in only limited circumstances and provides no support for a broad power to terminate grants on a whim based on newly identified agency priorities.”
The lawsuit argues the Trump administration has used the clause for the basis of a “slash-and-burn campaign” to cut federal grants.
“Defendants have terminated thousands of grant awards made to Plaintiffs, pulling the rug out from under the States, and taking away critical federal funding on which States and their residents rely for essential programs,” the lawsuit added.
Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha said this lawsuit was just one of several the coalition of mostly Democratic states have filed over funding cuts. For the most part, they have largely succeeded in a string of legal victories to temporarily halt cuts.
This one, though, may be the broadest challenge to those funding cuts.
“It’s no secret that this President has gone to great lengths to intercept federal funding to the states, but what may be lesser known is how the Trump Administration is attempting to justify their unlawful actions,” Neronha said in a statement. “Nearly every lawsuit this coalition of Democratic attorneys general has filed against the Administration is related to its unlawful and flagrant attempts to rob Americans of basic programs and services upon which they rely. Most often, this comes in the form of illegal federal funding cuts, which the Administration attempts to justify via a so-called ‘agency priorities clause.”
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said the lawsuit aimed to stop funding cuts he described as indiscriminate and illegal.
“There is no ‘because I don’t like you’ or ‘because I don’t feel like it anymore’ defunding clause in federal law that allows the President to bypass Congress on a whim,” Tong said in a statement. “Since his first minutes in office, Trump has unilaterally defunded our police, our schools, our health care, and more. He can’t do that, and that’s why over and over again we have blocked him in court and won back our funding.”
In Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Campbell said the US Department of Agriculture terminated a $11 million agreement with the state Department of Agricultural Resources connecting hundreds of farmers to hundreds of food distribution sites while the US Environmental Protection Agency terminated a $1 million grant to the state Department of Public Health to reduce asthma triggers in low-income communities.
“We cannot stand idly by while this President continues to launch unprecedented, unlawful attacks on Massachusetts’ residents, institutions, and economy,” Campbell said in a statement.
The lawsuit argues that the OMB promulgated the use of the clause in question to justify the cuts. The clause in question, according to the lawsuit, refers to five words that say federal agents can terminate grants if the award “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.”
“The Trump Administration has claimed that five words in this Clause— ‘no longer effectuates . . . agency priorities’— provide federal agencies with virtually unfettered authority to withhold federal funding any time they no longer wish to support the programs for which Congress has appropriated funding,” the lawsuit said.