Posts
 |
| This smile is the main reason he got elected |
I asked Grok this question: Can New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani be removed from office? The following is what the AI responded and put in my own words:
The New York City mayor can't be "impeached" in the way we think of the term from the federal level or even the state governor's process; no legislative trial, no articles voted up or down by a City Council acting as a Senate. The NYC Charter and state law don't provide for anything that dramatic or theatrical. Instead, there are two paths to showing a mayor the door, and both are more about removal for cause than a full-blown political spectacle.
First, and by far the most straightforward (if politically explosive), is the governor's power.
Under Section 9 of the City Charter, and backed by the state Constitution (Article XIII, sections 5 and 13) plus Public Officers Law §33, the governor of New York can simply remove the mayor. It's broad, almost sweeping authority with remarkably few guardrails. The process is this: the governor lays out charges (misconduct, corruption, dereliction of duty, whatever the executive deems sufficient), serves them on the mayor, and gives the target a chance to respond at a hearing. While that's pending, the governor can suspend the mayor for up to 30 days. If the charges stick after due process, out goes the mayor.
This isn't some theoretical relic; it's real authority, exercised rarely but memorably. Think back to 1932, when Governor Franklin Roosevelt had Mayor Jimmy Walker in his sights over bribery and corruption allegations. Walker resigned before the axe fell, but the threat was credible. Courts haven't cabined this power much, so the governor has wide discretion on what qualifies as removable offenses. In the context of recent events (say, federal indictments hanging over City Hall), people have pointed to Governor Kathy Hochul's leverage here, even if political realities make pulling the trigger a high-wire act. It's easy on paper, potentially devastating in practice.
The second route is the City Charter's "Committee on Mayoral Inability," a clunkier, more internal mechanism designed for incapacity rather than outright malfeasance. This five-member panel includes the Corporation Counsel, the Comptroller, the City Council Speaker, a deputy mayor picked by the sitting mayor (talk about a potential conflict), and the longest-serving borough president.
This isn't some theoretical relic; it's real authority, exercised rarely but memorably. Think back to 1932, when Governor Franklin Roosevelt had Mayor Jimmy Walker in his sights over bribery and corruption allegations. Walker resigned before the axe fell, but the threat was credible. Courts haven't cabined this power much, so the governor has wide discretion on what qualifies as removable offenses. In the context of recent events (say, federal indictments hanging over City Hall), people have pointed to Governor Kathy Hochul's leverage here, even if political realities make pulling the trigger a high-wire act. It's easy on paper, potentially devastating in practice.
The second route is the City Charter's "Committee on Mayoral Inability," a clunkier, more internal mechanism designed for incapacity rather than outright malfeasance. This five-member panel includes the Corporation Counsel, the Comptroller, the City Council Speaker, a deputy mayor picked by the sitting mayor (talk about a potential conflict), and the longest-serving borough president.
If four out of five agree that the mayor is temporarily or permanently unable to discharge the duties of the office, whether from health issues, legal entanglements that paralyze governance, or misconduct that renders effective leadership impossible, they can refer it to the full City Council.
Then the Council weighs in: a two-thirds vote (at least 34 of 51 members) is needed to confirm permanent removal or a suspension. It's a high bar, deliberately so, to avoid rash or partisan overreach. No mayor has ever been permanently ousted this way, which tells you how politically fraught and logistically challenging it would be, especially with that mayor-selected deputy potentially acting as a loyal blocker. But no mayor has been so far to the left and so obviously antisemitic as the present clown in office.
In either scenario, removal doesn't require a criminal conviction; charges or a finding of incapacity suffice, with due process baked in to satisfy constitutional concerns. If it happens, the Public Advocate steps in as acting mayor, and a special election follows for a permanent replacement. The system prioritizes stability over swift political justice; stability for the city, headaches for everyone else involved.
f you enjoy Brain Flushings and would like to subscribe or Buy Me a Coffee, or even check out the sponsors on this page, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work and my coffee drinking habit. No pressure and subscribing is free. So is checking out the advertisers on the blog.
Bottom line: no impeachment circus, just two very different levers, one gubernatorial sledgehammer, one cumbersome city committee, and neither gets pulled lightly. But when the pressure builds, as it has in recent years, those options suddenly look a lot more real.
Then the Council weighs in: a two-thirds vote (at least 34 of 51 members) is needed to confirm permanent removal or a suspension. It's a high bar, deliberately so, to avoid rash or partisan overreach. No mayor has ever been permanently ousted this way, which tells you how politically fraught and logistically challenging it would be, especially with that mayor-selected deputy potentially acting as a loyal blocker. But no mayor has been so far to the left and so obviously antisemitic as the present clown in office.
In either scenario, removal doesn't require a criminal conviction; charges or a finding of incapacity suffice, with due process baked in to satisfy constitutional concerns. If it happens, the Public Advocate steps in as acting mayor, and a special election follows for a permanent replacement. The system prioritizes stability over swift political justice; stability for the city, headaches for everyone else involved.
f you enjoy Brain Flushings and would like to subscribe or Buy Me a Coffee, or even check out the sponsors on this page, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work and my coffee drinking habit. No pressure and subscribing is free. So is checking out the advertisers on the blog.
Bottom line: no impeachment circus, just two very different levers, one gubernatorial sledgehammer, one cumbersome city committee, and neither gets pulled lightly. But when the pressure builds, as it has in recent years, those options suddenly look a lot more real.
The garbage is piling up on the streets; five thousand NYPD hiring slots are not going to be filled; and the calls to Islamic prayer are being blasted on city streets.
No comments:
Post a Comment