The Washington Post editorial board has launched one of the sharpest attacks yet on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, accusing him of turning resentment toward the wealthy into a political strategy and warning that his rhetoric could endanger private citizens.
The harshly worded criticism stood out for both its tone and source. The Post, long regarded as a liberal counterweight to The New York Times, has been shifting under billionaire owner Jeff Bezos, who has become a symbol of the ultrawealthy class Mamdani has made central to his political message. Days earlier, Mamdani boycotted the Met Gala after Bezos and his wife, Lauren Sánchez Bezos, served as honorary hosts and lead sponsors.
The editorial, published Wednesday, focused on a video Mamdani filmed outside the New York residence of hedge fund billionaire Ken Griffin, founder of Citadel. In the clip, Mamdani identified the building and said, “We’re taxing the rich.”
The Post argued that the mayor had not accused Griffin of breaking the law, avoiding taxes or abusing public power. Griffin’s only offense, the paper suggested, was being wealthy and successful. The editorial called Mamdani’s approach “the politics of envy” and said his effort to fund a major expansion of city government was “bound to be a fiscal failure” and “already a moral one.”
Griffin called the video “creepy and weird,” a phrase the editorial placed at the center of its critique. He also invoked the December 2024 killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, who was assassinated blocks from Griffin’s New York home.
“To put any citizen in harm’s way is just inappropriate for one of our political leaders,” Griffin said.
The editorial went further, arguing that Mamdani’s message teaches young people to resent success rather than try to emulate it.
Mamdani’s office rejected the criticism, saying the mayor wants “all New Yorkers to succeed” and that his campaign is aimed at reforming the tax code. The Post dismissed that defense, saying the video was not a serious argument over fiscal policy but an attempt to vilify Griffin personally.
The paper also defended Griffin’s role in the city, citing his philanthropy, including a $400 million donation with another billionaire to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Citadel’s statement that its principals and employees have paid nearly $2.3 billion in city and state taxes over the past five years.
The Met Gala has also turned into another front in Mamdani's fight against New York’s billionaire class. Instead of attending the celebrity-packed event, the mayor highlighted the workers behind the fashion industry: seamstresses, tailors, retail employees, delivery workers and warehouse workers.
His office released a photo portfolio celebrating them, saying the industry is made possible by “the thousands of workers behind the scenes.”
The move came as activists across the city protested Bezos’ role in the gala, with posters calling for a boycott and slogans projected near his penthouse, including, “If You Can Buy the Met Gala, You Can Pay More Taxes.”
Even as Mamdani faces growing resistance from billionaires and their media allies, he appeared to be moving closer to the first major political victory of his mayoral career as the New York City Rent Guidelines Board on Thursday night voted to keep alive the possibility of a rent freeze for roughly 1 million rent-stabilized apartments.
The nine-member panel approved preliminary ranges of 0% to 2% for one-year leases and 0% to 4% for two-year leases. The vote was 7-1, with one abstention. A final, binding vote is scheduled for June 25.
The decision does not mean rents are frozen. Rent-stabilized apartments are regulated, but landlords can still raise rents within limits set annually by the board. By including 0% in the official range, the board allowed Mamdani to say his campaign promise remains within reach. But if the final number is 1%, 2% or 4%, the outcome will be a limited increase, not a freeze.
“New Yorkers are being crushed by the cost of living, and they need real relief,” Mamdani said after the vote. He said the board had taken seriously the pressures facing both tenants and small property owners, and urged New Yorkers from every borough to testify before the final decision.
Tenant advocates were not fully satisfied. Two tenant-aligned board members proposed a more aggressive range that would have allowed rent reductions: minus 3% to 0% for one-year leases and minus 4.5% to 0% for two-year leases. The motion failed. After the board approved the narrower range, some tenants booed and shouted, “Shame on you,” angry that any increase remained possible.
Landlords also expressed frustration. Ann Korchak, board president of the Small Property Owners of New York, said the vote “continues a decade-long pattern of defunding privately owned rent-stabilized housing stock” and “clearly surrenders to City Hall’s political pressure.”
Property owners say they face rising taxes, insurance, utilities and repair costs, and warn that a freeze could damage the city’s aging housing stock.
The board’s own data shows why the issue is so contested. Net operating income for rent-stabilized buildings rose by more than 6% citywide between 2023 and 2024, but the picture varies sharply by borough and building age. Older buildings, especially in the Bronx, face different financial pressures than newer properties.
Tenants, meanwhile, remain under intense pressure in a city where the median asking rent for a new lease reached about $4,120 in April 2026, up from $2,800 in April 2019.