ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Komatireddy criticizes Mamdani veto on school protest bill

Mamdani said he reviewed the proposal but found it raised constitutional concerns.

Saritha Komatireddy and Zohran Mamdani / X (Saritha Komatireddy) and Wikimedia commons

New York attorney general candidate Saritha Komatireddy on April 24 criticized Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s veto of a NY City Council bill that would have required police to establish protest buffer zones around schools, calling the move a setback for student safety.

In a statement issued after the veto, Komatireddy said Mamdani’s decision undermined protections for students and raised broader civil rights concerns. “Making sure students of all races and religions can go to school safely is part of America’s civil rights legacy,” she said. “Today, the mayor turned his back on that legacy.”

She also faulted New York Attorney General Letitia James for not responding to the issue. “And not a word from our Attorney General, Letitia James, who’s charged with protecting the public,” Komatireddy said. “It’s disgraceful.”
 



Mamdani vetoed the legislation, known as Intro. 175-B, which had been passed by the New York City Council and would have directed the police department to create and publish protocols governing protest activity near schools and educational institutions.

In his statement on April 24, Mamdani said he reviewed the proposal but found it raised constitutional concerns. “The problem is how widely this bill defines an educational institution and the constitutional concerns it raises regarding New Yorkers’ fundamental right to protest,” he said.

He added that the bill’s scope could extend beyond schools. “As the bill is written, everywhere from universities to museums to teaching hospitals could face restrictions,” Mamdani said.
 



A related measure establishing security perimeters around houses of worship was approved by a veto-proof majority and was not rejected.

Komatireddy framed the veto as part of a broader debate over balancing public safety and First Amendment rights, stressing the need to protect students from disruption while maintaining legal protections.
 

Comments

Related

To continue...

Already have an account? Log in

Create your free account or log in