For a few tense minutes on live television, Crown Heights looked like a movie set for a city in crisis: flashing lights, police tape stretching across blocks, and squads of NYPD vehicles locking down the streets around one of Brooklyn’s most recognizable religious landmarks.
The breaking-news cut-in centered on Chabad-Lubavitch World Headquarters, known worldwide simply as “770.” According to the report, a driver was taken into custody after a car allegedly rammed the building’s side entrance—not once, but repeatedly.
Video that quickly spread online captured the disturbing rhythm of it: the vehicle hits the door, reverses, then slams forward again—over and over—until the entrance area is left visibly damaged and the crowd outside erupts in shock.
Police from the 71st Precinct arrived swiftly, taking the suspect into custody and transporting him for questioning. In the first updates, officials said there were no reported injuries, a detail that stood out given the chaos and the crowd size that night.
And that’s what made the timing feel especially heavy.
A community representative noted that this wasn’t just any evening at 770. The incident unfolded during Yud Shevat, a major date on the Chabad calendar that draws large gatherings—including visitors from around the world—to Crown Heights. In other words: the building wasn’t quiet. It was filled with people.
As investigators worked the scene, early reporting said authorities were evaluating the crash as a possible hate crime, especially after witnesses described the driver allegedly shouting hostile language. Officials also moved quickly to calm fears on the ground: the bomb squad checked the area and found no explosives, according to reports.
By the end of the live segment, the visuals were still the same—tape, lights, police—only now with the clearest detail viewers wanted: the driver was in custody, and the investigation was just beginning.
Car Rams NYC’s Chabad HQ “770” in Crown Heights — Driver Taken Into Custody (VIDEO)
NEW YORK (Jan. 28, 2026) — New York City Mayor Mamdani laid out what he called a fiscal crisis “greater than the Great Recession,” saying the city is staring at a $12 billion budget deficit and promising an “all-of-the-above” response: aggressive efficiencies, new revenue from the wealthiest New Yorkers and major corporations, and a reset of the city’s fiscal relationship with Albany.
Speaking during a City Hall press conference, Mamdani repeatedly drew a bright line between “savings and efficiencies” and “austerity,” arguing New Yorkers should not be asked to accept degraded public services because of what he described as years of budget mismanagement.
What Mamdani says caused the $12B gap
Mamdani blamed the prior administration for what he described as “gross fiscal mismanagement,” alleging that real program costs were not transparently reflected and that expenses were pushed “off the books.” He told reporters his team is now “going through every single dollar” the city spends and that spending must be defensible.
“If it cannot be defended,” he said in substance, “it’s not a dollar that should be spent.”
CityFHEPS costs and the legal fight over eligibility
Asked specifically about CityFHEPS—a housing voucher program whose costs have been criticized as rapidly expanding—Mamdani said his administration requested more time to work on a settlement in the CityFHEPS case. He framed the goal as balancing medium- and long-term housing access with a sustained and balanced budget.
On whether City Hall would continue litigation to stop an expansion of eligibility, Mamdani said those talks were ongoing, without committing to a final yes-or-no answer.
“Efficiencies, not austerity”: what’s on the table?
Pressed on whether agency cuts, vacancy eliminations, or broad reductions could be coming, Mamdani repeated that he intends to pursue every available efficiency—but not in ways that “come at the expense of working New Yorkers.”
When asked for concrete examples, he offered a small but telling illustration: a city AI chatbot he described as “functionally unusable” that cost roughly $500,000, calling it a sign of money spent without accountability. He emphasized that such examples do not close a $12B gap by themselves, but they point to a broader pattern he claims his team is now auditing.
Taxing the top 1% — and fighting for more from Albany
A major theme of Mamdani’s remarks was revenue.
He argued the city must consider raising taxes on the wealthiest residents and “the most profitable corporations,” and he defended a proposal to increase income taxes on the top 1% of New Yorkers by 2%.
He also pushed back on the idea that wealthier taxpayers would automatically flee, using a simple math example: for $1 million in annual income, a 2% increase equals $20,000 more in taxes—an amount he suggested is unlikely to drive relocation decisions for most high earners.
At the same time, Mamdani said the city needs to “recalibrate” its relationship with New York State. He cited an estimated $8 billion annual gap between what New York City contributes to state revenues and what it receives back, describing the imbalance as having grown over a decade through cost-shifting decisions he attributed largely to the Cuomo era.
Are NYPD cuts on the table?
On public safety spending, Mamdani said he is not entertaining cuts to essential services, including the NYPD. He acknowledged the need for savings and efficiencies (including longstanding attention to overtime spending), but insisted New Yorkers should not be left questioning whether critical city services will be delivered.
Will campaign promises be scaled back?
Asked whether the budget crisis forces him to revise campaign promises—previously estimated to cost about $10 billion—Mamdani said no, arguing the city should not allow past mismanagement to “dull” its ambitions.
He pointed to early progress on universal child care, saying more than $1 billion has already been secured toward that agenda and that his administration intends to “reckon with the mismanagement of the past” while still delivering on core commitments.
Timeline: when the detailed plan arrives
Reporters repeatedly asked for specifics—especially with the budget deadline looming. Mamdani said the city will deliver its preliminary budget on Feb. 17, 2026, and that the document will lay out the detailed steps to address the deficit. He added that City Hall will share additional specifics before then, including updated revenue assumptions tied to Wall Street bonuses and other receipts.
Cold-weather deaths and storm cleanup: other updates
Mamdani also addressed urgent quality-of-life and public health topics:
Cold-weather deaths: He said there had been no additional outdoor deaths since the prior update, described additional placements into shelter, and noted suspected hypothermia involvement in a majority of the deaths discussed—while stressing the official determination rests with the medical examiner.
Snow and bus stops: City Hall cited progress on clearing bus stop shelters—about 95% of sheltered stops cleared as of early morning—while noting property owners are responsible for many other areas and that the city is evaluating improvements for future storms.
SRG and protests: disbanding the unit
In a separate exchange, Mamdani reiterated his intent to disband the NYPD’s Strategic Response Group (SRG), saying he does not want a single unit combining counterterrorism responsibilities with policing of First Amendment protests. He said operational conversations with the police commissioner were underway and indicated SRG use would continue until those changes are implemented.
Mamdani’s message was clear: New York City’s $12 billion gap won’t be solved with one lever. He is promising a multi-front strategy—tightened spending discipline, new revenue at the top, and a larger fight over what the city receives from the state—while rejecting the framing that austerity and service cuts are inevitable.
Budget gap, CityFHEPS, and litigation
Q: The controller says CityFHEPS costs ballooned. Will you reflect those costs accurately in the preliminary budget, and will you continue litigation to stop expanding eligibility? A (Mamdani): He blamed the prior administration for budget and housing/assistance mismanagement, said the city asked for more time to work on a settlement in the CityFHEPS case, and emphasized a goal of balancing housing access with a sustained, balanced budget. On whether eligibility will expand, he said the conversations are ongoing (no firm yes/no yet).
“Efficiencies” vs “austerity” (cost-cutting)
Q: You criticized prior cost-cutting, but you say you’ll find efficiencies. Are agency cuts/eliminating vacancies on the table? A: He drew a sharp line: savings/efficiencies ≠ austerity. He said they’ll pursue every possible saving but not at the expense of working New Yorkers, and they’re reviewing every dollar—if they can’t defend it, it shouldn’t be spent.
Q (follow-up): Can you name specific efficiencies now, with the budget due soon? A: He said the next weeks are about assessing full fiscal health, and gave one example of waste: a prior administration AI chatbot that was “functionally unusable” and cost about $500,000—not a gap-closer, but a sign of mismanagement and hidden/ignored true costs.
Q: If you want a “relationship reset” with the state, is it more than two tax increases? A: Yes—he framed it as a crisis “greater than the Great Recession,” requiring an all-of-the-above approach: internal savings, higher taxes on the wealthiest and most profitable corporations, and recalibrating the NYC–state relationship so the city gets what it’s owed.
Q: Is it wise to call for higher taxes when the Governor isn’t interested—won’t that leave you stuck politically? A: He argued the city is already stuck because of the deficit, and said they won’t default to making “those with the least” bear the burden. He defended raising the top 1% NYC income tax by 2%, including an anecdote suggesting the increase wouldn’t trigger mass flight (he illustrated it as $20,000 on $1M income). He also said the city will advocate aggressively in Albany rather than staying quiet.
Q: Are you asking Albany to “pick up the tab” for specific programs (e.g., childcare expansion) to fix the imbalance? A: He said the fix is the city receiving what it is owed, citing an annual imbalance of about $8 billion (what NYC contributes vs. receives). He pointed to Cuomo-era cost shifts as examples of burdens moved from state to city, and implied they’ll seek to reverse that pattern.
Q: Why should the governor give the city more money if you can balance the budget with “efficiencies”? Will the preliminary budget assume $X from the state? A: He said $12B cannot be solved by efficiencies alone. The solution must combine spending scrutiny plus new revenue and a new fiscal relationship with the state. He wouldn’t preview exact state-line assumptions before releasing the preliminary budget.
Revenue assumptions and “being conservative”
Q: Under Adams, conservative revenue estimates were used to justify cuts; then Wall Street/high-earner receipts came in higher. Are you being conservative now about Wall Street revenue/bonuses? A: He said they’re encouraged by reports of higher bonuses and increased revenue, but the $12B deficit is too large to be covered by that, so they still need structural solutions.
“Give more details” — timeline and the preliminary budget
Q: You say you’ll be transparent, but you’re not giving practical detail on cuts. What will New Yorkers actually face? And what have your talks with Governor Hochul been like? A: He said specifics will come with the preliminary budget on February 17, and that between now and then they will share additional specifics on the gap after updated revenues/bonuses, and on the savings they’re pursuing—while stressing they won’t use the crisis to justify pulling back essential services. On Hochul, he said he’s encouraged by the conversations and the relationship they’re building.
NYPD and public safety
Q: Are NYPD cuts on the table (especially overtime)? A: He said they are not entertaining cuts; they’re discussing savings/efficiencies without making New Yorkers doubt essential services will be delivered.
Campaign promises vs the deficit
Q: Do you need to revise campaign promises (estimated ~$10B), now with a $12B out-of-balance situation? A: He said no—they won’t let prior failures “dull” their ambitions. He cited early progress: over $1B secured toward universal childcare (he framed it as achieved very early in the administration). The message: fix past mismanagement, handle the present crisis, and still deliver a future where working New Yorkers aren’t priced out.
Cold-weather deaths update (separate topic)
Q: Any new information on cold-weather deaths? A: He said no additional outdoor deaths since last update; about 30 additional placements were made since the prior night; they suspect ~7 of 10 deaths had hypothermia as a factor; ~6 of 10 were known to DHS. He emphasized the medical examiner will determine official cause and described the 5–7 day post-autopsy timeline for results.
He also described visiting Bellevue (warming center) and joining outreach workers, sharing an anecdote about an older man’s personal story and praising city workers/outreach teams.
SRG (Strategic Response Group) and protests
Q: Are you asking Albany for the full $8B gap back? And you campaigned on disbanding SRG—would you do it, is it an “inefficiency,” would you replace it? A: He said he still believes SRG should be disbanded, and he’s in talks with the police commissioner about operational implementation. He framed the rationale primarily as policy/rights, not budget: SRG shouldn’t combine counterterrorism with responses to First Amendment activity. On the $8B question: he said they’ll share more details on the gap for this fiscal year and next once updated revenues/bonuses are accounted for, but reiterated the “all-of-the-above” approach.
Q (follow-ups): Did you know SRG would be at an anti-ICE protest last night? Are you concerned? Have you told NYPD not to use them at protests “for now”? A: He said SRG will continue to be used until they implement the operational change. He added NYPD must respond to protests and must do so in ways that respect First Amendment rights. He also said he commends New Yorkers protesting ICE abuses, referencing Minneapolis.
Q: Sidewalks/crosswalks/bus stops are still a mess days after the storm. Any new ideas for future storms? A: He said they’ll keep looking for ways to deliver for all modes of transit. He cited a stat: by 7:10 a.m., DOT cleared 3,227 bus stop shelters (~95% of ~3,400 with shelters). He noted property owners are responsible for many remaining stops and said the city is examining how to increase service levels. He praised city workers and noted the storm was followed by unusually severe cold (the coldest in at least eight years, per his remark).
Was the public misled under Adams?
Q: We used to hear “we must cut,” then Council restored things—was the public misled? A: He said Adams’s administration misled the public about the scale of the deficit and accused them of pushing real costs “off the books.” He contrasted that with his pledge to be open and honest about the true costs of services and what it will take to fix the problem.
Statewide fairness and progressive taxation
Q (final): The state taxes wealthy NYC people and uses revenue to help poorer upstate cities. Are you saying NYC should keep its wealth and forget the rest of the state? A: He said it’s important to care for needy New Yorkers statewide, but argued the cost-shifting wasn’t about helping upstate—it was about punishing NYC, describing the growing “chasm” over a decade and expressing hope for a new course.
On January 28, 2026, New York City Mayor Mamdani delivers a blunt warning: NYC is facing a serious fiscal crisis, with a budget deficit of at least $12 billion. He calls it the “Adams budget crisis,” alleging the prior administration systematically underbudgeted essential services—including rental assistance, shelters, and special education—creating what he describes as massive hidden gaps.
Mamdani also argues NYC’s finances were strained over years by a state–city imbalance, claiming New Yorkers contribute a larger share of state revenue than the city receives back. He cites independent projections (including city and state controllers) and says the true budget gaps are far higher than previously presented, framing the moment as more severe than the Great Recession-era gaps and over 300% above the pre-pandemic 10-year average in some years.
He promises a balanced budget within two fiscal years, rejects balancing it “on the backs of working people,” and signals bold solutions: resetting the fiscal relationship with Albany and taxing the richest New Yorkers and most profitable corporations—while pledging honesty, transparency, and clear communication about decisions ahead.
New York is betting big on “self-driving” science. Governor Kathy Hochul announced that Radical AI will open New York’s first fully autonomous materials science laboratory at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, building a new headquarters and AI-driven labs designed to run around 100 experiments per day. The $4 million project is backed by up to $2 million in performance-based Empire State Development tax credits and is expected to create 115 new high-paying jobs—as the company aims to compress years of materials discovery into months for industries like energy, aerospace, infrastructure, defense, and manufacturing.
J
Governor Hochul Celebrates Radical AI Establishing New York’s First Fully Autonomous Materials Science Labs at the Brooklyn Navy Yard
Materials Science R&D Company Will Renovate New Headquarters and Build Advanced AI-Driven Labs
Project Will Create 115 New High-Paying Jobs and Catalyze New York City’s Growing Deep-Tech and Artificial Intelligence Sector
Supported by up to $2 Million in Performance-Based ESD Excelsior Jobs Program Tax Credits
Governor Kathy Hochul today celebrated Radical AI, a scientific research and development company focused on discovering novel inorganic materials, for establishing New York’s first fully autonomous materials science laboratory at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The company will renovate and repurpose space in Building 20 to create a state-of-the-art headquarters and research facility capable of running approximately 100 AI-driven experiments per day. The $4 million project, supported by up to $2 million in performance-based Excelsior Jobs Program tax credits from Empire State Development (ESD), is expected to create 115 new high-paying jobs in the fast-growing fields of materials science and AI. This investment builds on New York’s statewide strategy to grow next-generation industries, expand high-wage job opportunities, and strengthen the state’s innovation economy.
“New York is leading the nation in turning cutting-edge research into real-world innovation and good-paying jobs,” Governor Hochul said. “Radical AI’s decision to establish the state’s first fully autonomous materials science laboratory at the Brooklyn Navy Yard strengthens our position as a global hub for artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and deep-tech research. By investing in companies that push the boundaries of science and technology, we’re ensuring the discoveries that drive long-term economic growth are developed, scaled, and commercialized in this state.”
Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “Radical AI’s decision to build New York’s first fully autonomous materials science lab at the Brooklyn Navy Yard underscores the strength and diversity of our innovation economy. This project brings together artificial intelligence, advanced research, and high-quality job creation in a field that touches nearly every sector of the global economy. With support from Empire State Development, Radical AI is helping ensure that the next wave of materials discovery, commercialization, and startup growth happens right here in New York City.”
Radical AI CEO and Co-Founder Joseph Krause said, “Our new facility will run materials experiments at a pace and scale that traditional R&D cannot match, capturing experimental data that makes our AI smarter over time in a continuous data feedback loop. Our mission is to compress decades of materials discovery into years or months, and we’re grateful to ESD for backing that vision.”
NYCREDC Co-Chairs Félix V. Matos Rodríguez, City University of New York Chancellor and William D. Rahm, CEO of Everview Partners, said, “New York City’s economic future depends on our ability to attract and grow companies operating at the cutting edge of science and technology. Radical AI’s expansion at the Brooklyn Navy Yard reflects the region’s unmatched talent pipeline, research capacity, and collaborative innovation environment. This project will not only create high-paying jobs, but also strengthen New York City’s position as a global center for AI-driven research, advanced manufacturing, and next-generation startup development.”
New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC) Senior Vice President of Partnerships Justin Kreamer said, “We are thrilled that Radical AI will establish New York’s first fully autonomous materials science laboratory at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, benefiting from New York City’s deep talent pool and contributing to its status as the applied AI capital of the world. Radical AI’s new state-of-the-art headquarters will create over 100 future-oriented jobs, serve as a key hub for AI experimentation and research, and deepen New York City’s commitment to sustainable materials innovation, joining impactful initiatives already under way such as Gotham Foundry.”
Assemblymember Steven Otis said, “Congratulations to Governor Hochul, NYS Empire State Development, and the research and technology innovator, Radical AI for the exciting news of the cutting-edge materials research lab that will be at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Materials research, development, and testing are vital to our economic, environmental, and technology future. Radical AI is a leader in using AI to examine materials suitability for energy and technology innovation. This important research will give birth to new economic and growth opportunities and again highlights New York’s leadership in technology innovation. This announcement is also an example of the success of Governor Hochul’s focus on job expansion in technology industries and the synergy New York offers by bringing these companies to our state.”
Founded in 2024, Radical AI has grown from a small research team into a rapidly scaling company focused on accelerating the discovery of next-generation materials. Today, the company employs approximately 34 scientists, engineers, and technologists working at the intersection of AI, robotics, and materials chemistry. The company’s mission is to develop, test, and commercialize entirely new classes of materials that can transform a wide range of industries—from aerospace and energy to infrastructure, defense and manufacturing. Their autonomous technology combines AI and a self-driving laboratory to rapidly discover entirely novel materials that would otherwise take 10-to-20 years to develop. This approach enables faster innovation across industries such as energy, transportation, and advanced manufacturing, strengthening the city’s role in next-generation technology development.
Radical AI plans to convert an existing office space into a fully outfitted, advanced materials science lab equipped with specialized tools, gas lines, robotics systems, updated safety and organizational layouts, and essential infrastructure upgrades. Radical AI’s autonomous laboratory will focus exclusively on discovering new inorganic materials through AI-driven experimentation and R&D. The company’s high-throughput approach will accelerate the traditionally slow process of materials discovery by 370x, creating novel materials with applications across multiple industries.
With its expansion into the Brooklyn Navy Yard, Radical AI will further deepen its footprint in New York City and reinforce the city’s growing leadership in artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, and deep-tech research. This investment strengthens the city’s innovation ecosystem by pairing cutting-edge AI capabilities with world-class scientific talent, creating a new hub for materials discovery that will support startup formation, commercialization, and long-term economic growth across multiple industries. As materials science underpins everything from energy and transportation to defense and manufacturing, Radical AI’s presence at the Brooklyn Navy Yard positions New York City at the forefront of the next generation of technological breakthroughs.
Autonomous materials science combines AI, robotics, and advanced chemistry to rapidly discover entirely new materials that would otherwise take years to develop. This approach enables faster innovation across industries such as clean energy, transportation, and advanced manufacturing, strengthening the city’s role in next-generation technology development.
About Empire State Development Empire State Development is New York’s chief economic development agency, and promotes business growth, job creation, and greater economic opportunity throughout the state. With offices in each of the state’s 10 regions, ESD oversees the Regional Economic Development Councils, supports broadband equity through the ConnectALL office, and is growing the workforce of tomorrow through the Office of Strategic Workforce Development. The agency engages with emerging and next generation industries like clean energy and semiconductor manufacturing looking to grow in New York State, operates a network of assistance centers to help small businesses grow and succeed, and promotes the state’s world class tourism destinations through I LOVE NY. For more information, please visit esd.ny.gov, and connect with ESD on LinkedIn, Facebook and X.
About Radical AI Radical AI is a materials company combining AI and a self-driving, robotic lab to discover novel inorganic materials for mission-critical industries like aerospace, infrastructure, defense, energy and manufacturing. The company uses AI technology to screen billions of materials and identify the best candidates, synthesizes and tests these candidates in an autonomous lab, and captures valuable experimental data to improve future predictions in a closed-loop system. Radical has raised $55 million in seed funding led by RTX Ventures with participation from NVentures (NVIDIA), Noa, Eni, Infinite Capital, and AlleyCorp. The company is a Department of Energy partner in the White House Genesis Mission and holds an Air Force AFWERX contract to develop high-entropy alloys for hypersonic flight. For more information, visit radical-ai.com.
In a new segment, conservative commentator Benny Johnson argues that America’s biggest sports leagues are paying a price for turning marquee moments into political flashpoints. He points to recent viewership softness in the NFL and NBA and claims fans are increasingly rejecting what he frames as “message-first” programming—especially around the Super Bowl halftime show.
The video centers on Bad Bunny’s upcoming Super Bowl LX halftime performance (February 8, 2026, Levi’s Stadium) and a wave of online backlash tied to rumors about a provocative wardrobe choice and an LGBTQ-themed tribute—claims Johnson attributes to entertainment reporting and “inside sources,” while urging viewers to see the controversy as part of a broader cultural campaign. Separately, he highlights conservative responses and boycott talk, including discussion of federal security and immigration enforcement at the event.
Why it matters: The episode captures a widening debate about whether leagues should keep major broadcasts strictly entertainment-focused—or continue leaning into cultural and political messaging, even at the risk of alienating parts of the audience. Bad Bunny’s selection as headliner is confirmed by the NFL, but specific outfit details and the most sensational allegations remain unverified in official statements.
Viral video posted on January 25, 2026 by commentator Benny Johnson claims that journalist-activist James O’Keefe was “hunted” in downtown Minneapolis while covering unrest tied to anti-ICE protests. In the clip, Johnson frames Minneapolis as the epicenter of a broader confrontation over federal immigration enforcement and portrays the city as a testing ground for organized street pressure against federal authorities and independent media.
Central to the video are O’Keefe’s own allegations: he says he and his team were surrounded by a crowd, pelted with ice bottles, followed to their hotel, and threatened via text message with a one-hour ultimatum to leave the city. O’Keefe also claims the group tracking them had access to unusually detailed vehicle information—down to a license plate—and suggests coordination that goes beyond spontaneous protest activity. The video further implies local or state-level complicity, though it provides no independently verified proof of official involvement beyond the commentary and screenshots shown.
The claims arrive amid a documented surge of tension in Minneapolis following deadly encounters involving federal immigration agents. Major outlets have reported on the killing of ICU nurse Alex Pretti on January 24, 2026, after which protests intensified, and on earlier clashes and legal battles over how federal agents have interacted with demonstrators and observers in the Twin Cities.
At this stage, the video’s most serious allegations—an organized attempt on O’Keefe’s life, coordinated “autonomous zones,” and state-enabled tracking—should be treated as unverified claims pending corroboration from law enforcement records, additional video evidence, or independent reporting. What is clear is that Minneapolis is experiencing a highly volatile moment, with escalating protests, competing narratives about public safety, and intensifying disputes between federal operations and local/state leaders.
In this video, Amir Tsarfati interviews Rawan Osman, who shares her personal journey from being raised in a culture of antisemitism to becoming a courageous voice against it.
Here’s a breakdown of the key points:
Rawan’s Background (2:00): Rawan was born in Damascus and raised in Lebanon, attending a French Catholic school. She grew up in a society that, despite being generally tolerant, harbored a deep-seated hatred for Jews, Zionists, and Israelis (5:55). She admits to having been a strong supporter of Hezbollah, viewing them as liberators against Israeli occupation (6:25).
Indoctrination and Misinformation (7:10): Rawan explains that she was taught to hate Jews without understanding the full historical context. She learned a simplified version of history where Israel was the aggressor, omitting details about Palestinian groups’ actions that led to Israeli military responses in Lebanon (7:10). She also describes how Christian antisemitism was subtly instilled through the school curriculum and films like “The Passion of the Christ” (8:26).
The Problem with Education (9:49): Rawan highlights that the Lebanese curriculum presents a biased narrative of “Palestine,” portraying Theodor Herzl as the antagonist who invented Zionism to take land from Palestinians (9:49). This narrative led to the internalization that “Palestine was a country” with indigenous people, and that supporting the “underdog” against the “Jew” was the morally correct stance (10:43).
Her Epiphany in Europe (11:07): Rawan’s perspective began to shift when she moved to Europe in her mid-20s and found herself living in a Jewish quarter in Strasbourg, France (11:07). Her initial panic attack upon seeing religious Jews made her question why she harbored such fear and hatred towards people she had never interacted with (12:22). This realization led her to re-examine the history of the region.
Relearning History and Jewish Identity (12:57): Through her research, Rawan discovered that Jews are indigenous to the Middle East, challenging the narrative that they originated solely from Eastern Europe (12:57). She also realized that modern nation-states in the Middle East are relatively new, making the categorical rejection of Israel illogical (13:23). She was “disappointed” to learn that her “side” was the aggressor and had brainwashed people with hatred (13:48). She concludes that the problem has always been with the Jews themselves, not just the state of Israel (18:18).
Antisemitism and Muslim Supremacy (18:43): Rawan argues that Israel’s existence as the first Jewish state challenges Muslim supremacy, as Jews were the first minority to demand self-governance and equality (18:43). She explains that in Islam, land once governed by Muslims cannot be lost, making Israel’s existence unacceptable to some (20:49).
The Global Reach of Antisemitism (22:07): She discusses the 1929 Hebron massacre as an example of pre-state anti-Jewish violence, leading Jews to leave Arab countries out of fear (22:07). Rawan notes the widespread nature of antisemitism in the Arab world, citing examples like Hitler’s Mein Kampf being found in Gaza and stores named “Hitler” in the West Bank (27:10). She highlights that October 7th revealed the extent of this global problem, where world sympathy for Israel quickly turned into condemnation (30:03).
Hope for the Future (47:56): Despite the challenges, Rawan expresses optimism, driven by her newfound faith and identification with Judaism (47:56). She believes that while the West is turning against Israel, support will emerge from the Arab world, as people realize their own economic and social problems are not caused by Israel or Jews (49:16). She points to countries like the UAE and Morocco as examples of nations that have blessed Israel and consequently experienced blessings (49:40).
The video, titled “Dangerous anti-ICE rhetoric from Mayor Frey & Gov Walz hasn’t protected anyone, only fueled chaos,” discusses the stance of Mayor Frey and Governor Walz against cooperation with ICE and other federal agencies.
Non-cooperation with ICE (0:00-0:05): Mayor Frey explicitly states that Minneapolis will not cooperate with ICE or any federal agency.
Fueling chaos and distrust (0:07-0:10): The video claims that such actions are causing chaos and distrust.
Responsibility to “bring down the temperature” (0:13-0:16): The speaker mentions bearing responsibility to reduce tensions regarding ICE.
Protests as patriotic duty (0:26-0:41): Protests in Minneapolis are described as peaceful, and the desire to protest against the administration is considered a “patriotic duty.”
Peaceful protests (0:44-0:48): It is noted that tens of thousands of people have been peacefully protesting.
Standing up for neighbors (0:52-0:54): People are willing to stand up for their neighbors.
No further federal help needed (1:03-1:09): A clear message is sent that no further help is needed from the federal government.
Erwin Chemerinsky—Dean of UC Berkeley School of Law and one of the country’s best-known constitutional law scholars—has a blunt thesis: the United States is facing a crisis of legitimacy and institutional design that could make democratic self-government unsustainable. He lays out that argument in his 2024 book, No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States, and in a widely circulated Berkeley Law alumni talk that frames the book as a warning flare for the American system.
That warning has sparked an equally blunt rebuttal from many critics: the United States was never designed to be a “pure democracy” governed by simple majorities. It was designed as a constitutional republic—a representative system constrained by a written constitution—precisely to protect individuals from two perennial dangers: tyranny from above (abuse by rulers) and tyranny from below (majority faction turning politics into legalized coercion).
This debate isn’t an academic parlor game. It’s now moving to a major public stage in New York.
What Chemerinsky argues in No Democracy Lasts Forever
Chemerinsky’s core claim is that American democracy is under severe stress because public confidence in institutions has collapsed and political polarization has hardened into something closer to mutual illegitimacy. In the Berkeley book talk, he argues the crisis is not just cultural—it is structural.
Among the structural issues he highlights:
The Electoral College: He argues it can produce presidents who lose the national popular vote and that winner-take-all allocation in most states amplifies that risk.
The U.S. Senate: Equal representation for states regardless of population, he argues, violates democratic intuitions about political equality and entrenches “minority rule.”
Gerrymandering and representation: He contends partisan map-drawing has made the House less responsive, and that legal constraints limit effective remedies.
The Supreme Court’s role and tenure: He criticizes life tenure as placing too much power in too few hands for too long, and describes the Court as a central actor in democratic backsliding.
Money in politics: He argues that the scale and opacity of campaign spending corrodes public trust and democratic legitimacy.
Chemerinsky also proposes remedies—some statutory, some constitutional—and, in the longer arc, suggests Americans should at least begin thinking about what a modern constitutional replacement process might look like (even if not imminent).
The controversy: “Democracy is failing” vs. “A republic with guardrails is the point”
The sharpest disagreement is not whether the country is polarized. It is what standard should be used to evaluate constitutional design.
Chemerinsky often describes the U.S. as a “constitutional democracy” and measures legitimacy against a majoritarian benchmark: outcomes should track popular majorities more consistently, and institutions that systematically distort majority rule are treated as core democratic defects.
Critics respond that this framing smuggles in a premise the Founders explicitly resisted: that “more direct democracy” is inherently better.
1) The Constitution guarantees “republican” government—not direct majoritarian rule. Article IV, Section 4 requires the United States to guarantee each state a “Republican Form of Government.” Whatever else Americans argue about, the constitutional text chooses “republican” as the baseline civic architecture.
2) Madison’s warning: “pure democracies” can be violent and unstable. In Federalist No. 10, Madison draws a famous contrast between a republic and what he calls “such democracies,” warning they have historically been “spectacles of turbulence and contention” and incompatible with personal security and the rights of property.
This is a foundational insight for critics: the system was designed not to maximize majority power, but to control the predictable pathologies of majority power.
3) The “two tyrannies” problem: protect society from rulers and from majorities. Federalist No. 51 states the principle in plain language: it is vital “in a republic” not only to guard society against oppression by its rulers, but also to guard “one part of the society against the injustice of the other part,” because if a majority unites around a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.
This is the conceptual backbone of the “constitutional republic” critique of Chemerinsky: many so-called “anti-democratic” features are better understood as anti-tyrannical guardrails—constraints that prevent elections from becoming a moral permission slip to punish disfavored groups.
4) Courts are not meant to be majoritarian institutions. Chemerinsky’s critique of judicial power and long tenure often collides with Hamilton’s argument in Federalist No. 78 that life tenure “during good behavior” is a barrier against despotism in a monarchy—and, in a republic, a barrier against “encroachments and oppressions of the representative body.”
In this view, the judiciary’s legitimacy is not measured by popularity; it is measured by fidelity to higher law—especially when popular majorities demand shortcuts.
A key clarification that strengthens the critique
Even many constitutional conservatives concede an important nuance: the Constitution does not literally contain the phrase “constitutional republic.” The more precise claim is that the U.S. is a representative republic operating under a written constitution, and that “democracy” (as used in modern speech) should be understood as representative democracy, not pure direct democracy.
This matters rhetorically. It allows critics to challenge Chemerinsky’s framing without making an easily refutable claim like “America isn’t a democracy at all.” The stronger, more defensible line is: America is not a pure democracy—and it was never intended to be; it is a constitutional republic built to protect liberty against both top-down tyranny and majority faction.
Coming up in NYC: Brennan Center Jorde Symposium, Feb. 5
This dispute over constitutional legitimacy will intersect with an in-person NYU event next month.
On Thursday, February 5, 2026, the Brennan Center for Justice will host the Jorde Symposium: “Against Constitutional Theory” at NYU School of Law (Greenberg Lounge), 40 Washington Square South, New York, NY. The program runs 4:00–5:50 p.m. ET, followed by a reception 5:50–6:30 p.m.
Erwin Chemerinsky is the featured lecturer. Commentators include Leah Litman (University of Michigan Law School) and Sherif Girgis (University of Notre Dame Law School). The event is open to the public but requires RSVP, and is listed as free.
For anyone tracking the national argument over “democracy,” constitutional limits, and the role of courts, this is one of the most substantive public constitutional law events on the New York calendar—especially because it puts Chemerinsky’s broader book thesis in conversation with scholars who do not share all of his premises.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani addressed a fatal Bronx fire and detailed extensive city-wide preparations for an incoming winter storm, including snow removal, cold weather protocols, and public safety advisories for residents to stay indoors.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani held a press conference on January 24, 2026, to discuss two main topics: a tragic fire in the Bronx and the city’s preparations for an upcoming winter storm.
The mayor first addressed a four-alarm fire in Eastchester, Bronx, which resulted in 15 injuries and one fatality (0:21-0:47). He thanked the FDNY and other city agencies for their immediate response and confirmed that utilities in the affected building were shut down, with all 148 apartments vacated (1:21-1:26). A reception center was opened at a nearby school, and the Red Cross is assisting displaced residents (1:27-1:32). An investigation into the fire’s cause is ongoing (2:01-2:06).
Following this, the mayor detailed the city’s winter storm preparations:
Snowfall and conditions: Snow is expected to begin late Sunday evening, intensifying around 5:00 a.m. Monday (2:32-2:42). Heavy snowfall is anticipated in the late morning and early afternoon, with low visibility and winds up to 35 mph, creating near-blizzard conditions (2:53-3:08). The snow is expected to turn to sleet by Sunday evening and clear by early Monday morning (3:09-3:20).
Expected accumulation and cold temperatures: The city anticipates at least 8 to 9 inches of snow, along with a prolonged period of frigid temperatures, possibly the coldest in 8 years (3:22-3:42).
City agency preparations: Various agencies have undertaken extensive measures:
DSNY has brined highways and major roadways (3:59-4:02), and over 2,000 workers will staff 12-hour shifts, deploying more than 700 salt spreaders and 2,300 plow vehicles (6:36-6:51).
Public schools have prepared for remote learning (4:05-4:11) and conducted pressure testing for virtual operations (4:14-4:22). A decision on Monday’s school status will be announced by 12:00 p.m. tomorrow (15:02-15:13).
NYCHA increased staffing for weather-related repairs (4:23-4:26).
Parks workers pre-salted parks (4:27-4:28).
FDNY increased firefighters per engine company and is operating under enhanced readiness (4:30-4:37).
MTA activated its incident command system and emergency operations center (4:37-4:43).
NYC Emergency Management activated its winter weather plan and held daily coordination calls (4:45-4:57). They also used 311 reports from past storms to address previous service shortcomings (4:59-5:14).
Homeless services and public safety: A “Code Blue” is in effect, ensuring homeless New Yorkers have access to shelter beds (5:37-6:01). 311 calls for warmth access will be rerouted to 911 during this period (6:15-6:22).
Travel advisory: A hazardous travel advisory will be in effect on Sunday and Monday. New Yorkers are urged to avoid driving and unnecessary travel (9:00-9:12) and to stay indoors (9:16-9:23).
Suspended services: City bike service will be suspended starting 12:00 p.m. tomorrow (8:13-8:17), and early voting for tomorrow and Monday has been suspended by the State Board of Elections (8:17-8:22). New Yorkers are encouraged to sign up for Notify NYC alerts (8:23-8:38).
The mayor expressed gratitude to the city’s workers for their tireless efforts in preparing for the storm and for their ongoing commitment to keeping the city safe (10:11-10:22, 13:36-14:36). He emphasized that every New Yorker will receive the same level of service regardless of their zip code or neighborhood (11:03-11:11).
