Republicans Consider Invoking 14th Amendment to Block Mamdani From Mayoral Office

A growing number of House Republicans are weighing whether to use a rarely applied clause in the U.S. Constitution to bar New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani from assuming office if he wins next week’s election. The discussion centers on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, the so-called insurrection clause, which prohibits anyone who has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or given “aid or comfort to the enemies” of the United States from holding public office.

According to reports first published by the New York Post and confirmed by congressional sources, several GOP lawmakers and conservative activists are studying ways to invoke the provision against Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist and current state assembly member from Queens. They argue that his past rhetoric and affiliations — including his public support for “resisting ICE” and associations with progressive advocacy groups — could be interpreted as violating the constitutional standard.

Stefano Forte, president of the New York Young Republican Club, confirmed that the organization is working closely with legal advisers and congressional offices to determine how the clause might apply. “There is a real and legitimate push to see whether Zohran Mamdani, who has repeatedly made statements undermining American law enforcement, can be prevented from taking office,” Forte said in a statement.

The 14th Amendment provision was originally adopted in 1868 to prevent former Confederates from returning to positions of power after the Civil War. It has since been invoked sparingly but recently resurfaced during efforts to block former President Donald Trump from state ballots over his alleged role in the events of January 6, 2021. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled earlier this year that only Congress, not individual states, has the authority to enforce the clause.

That ruling has now shifted the focus to Capitol Hill, where Republican lawmakers hold a narrow 219–213 majority in the House. According to two congressional aides familiar with the discussions, GOP members are exploring whether they could introduce a resolution or legislation declaring Mamdani ineligible for public office under the 14th Amendment.

Such a move, however, would face steep procedural and legal challenges, including a likely Senate filibuster and inevitable judicial review. Constitutional scholars note that the language of Section 3 is intentionally vague and that applying it to a local election could set a new and controversial precedent.

In addition to the constitutional debate, House Republicans are urging the Department of Justice to investigate Mamdani’s U.S. citizenship status. Representative Andy Ogles (R-TN) sent a formal letter this week to Attorney General Pam Bondi, claiming that Mamdani’s public remarks and affiliations may conflict with the oath of allegiance he took during his 2018 naturalization.

In the letter, Ogles alleged that Mamdani’s political activities and “refusal to disavow anti-American rhetoric” could justify a review under federal denaturalization statutes. He also called on the Justice Department to determine whether the candidate had omitted any affiliations with groups that could be interpreted as subversive or extremist in nature.

“Anyone who seeks to hold the highest municipal office in the largest city in America should be transparent about their beliefs and allegiances,” Ogles wrote. “We have a duty to ensure that the integrity of our citizenship process is upheld.”

Representative Randy Fine (R-FL) echoed those concerns, accusing Mamdani of failing to disclose his involvement with certain activist organizations on his citizenship forms. Fine went further on social media, suggesting that New York was “on the verge of handing its city to an openly socialist movement.”

For his part, Mamdani has dismissed the accusations as politically motivated and rooted in fear of his campaign’s growing momentum. “These attacks are nothing more than an attempt to silence progressive voices,” he said during an interview with The New York Post. “Calling me names or questioning my citizenship won’t change the fact that I’ve spent my career fighting for working people and for justice in New York City.”

He added that the Republican effort represents “a weaponization of constitutional language for partisan purposes.”

A Justice Department spokesperson confirmed receipt of Ogles’ letter but declined to comment further, citing the ongoing federal government shutdown that has delayed responses to congressional correspondence.

Legal experts say the situation underscores how constitutional provisions written in the aftermath of the Civil War are being revived in modern political conflicts. “The 14th Amendment’s Section 3 is intentionally broad, but applying it to a municipal official for political speech rather than violent rebellion would be unprecedented,” said constitutional law professor Harold Simmons of Georgetown University. “It would test the limits of congressional authority and almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court again.”

As New York City prepares for Tuesday’s mayoral election, the controversy adds yet another layer of tension to an already turbulent political climate. Whether the post–Civil War clause can be used against a modern-day progressive remains a question that could reshape constitutional boundaries — and perhaps the future of political eligibility in America.