At least 20 percent of New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani’s administrative appointees are connected to groups characterized as anti-Zionist, according to a Monday report by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

The report found that more than 80 individuals among Mamdani’s 400-plus transition and administrative appointees either have ties to such groups or a "documented history of making anti-Israel statements." 

The organization said Mamdani’s Transition Committee appointees have been linked to groups including Students for Justice in Palestine, a pro-Palestinian college activism network; Jewish Voice for Peace, an American Jewish anti-Zionist organization; and Within Our Lifetime, a New York City-based anti-Zionist group "known for leading protests outside synagogues."

For example, the ADL said at least four appointees have ties to Louis Farrakhan, the antisemitic leader of the Nation of Islam. One appointee, Jacques Léandre, was cited for reportedly attending a conference at which Farrakhan denounced "the Jews and their power."

ADL CHIEF WARNS NYC MAYOR-ELECT ZOHRAN MAMDANI POSES A 'CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER' TO JEWISH COMMUNITY

Several other appointees were also cited for statements that appear to support or justify violence against Israel and the Oct. 7 attacks. According to the ADL, Kazi Fouzia posted on Facebook hours after the attacks that "Resistance are [sic] Justified when people are occupied" with video footage from an anti-Israel protest happening that day in Manhattan.

The report continued to identify other appointees who publicly expressed hostility toward Zionism. 

Examples included Fahd Ahmed, who allegedly stated "Zionism is racism"; Ruha Benjamin, who reportedly signed a statement saying Israel was "ideologically founded on Jewish supremacy"; Lisa Ohta, who was accused of referring to "Zionism’s genocidal ideology"; and Mohammed Karim Chowdhury, who shared a post allegedly claiming "Zionists are worse than … Nazis." 

MAMDANI'S FATHER SAYS COLUMBIA 'TARGETED' ANTI-ISRAEL STUDENTS WITH ANTISEMITISM CRACKDOWN

The organization also identified Zakiyah Shaakir-Ansari, who was cited for allegedly posting a photo of herself at an encampment in front of a banner displaying an inverted red triangle, a symbol associated with Hamas, alongside the text "LONG LIVE THE RESISTANCE."

The report also states that at least 12 appointees publicly expressed support for anti-Israel campus encampments during the spring of 2024, with at least five attending the protests in person. The ADL highlighted Gianpaolo Baiocchi, who was reportedly arrested at the NYU encampment and later asserted that no hate speech was present. The ADL disputes that claim, citing flyers distributed at the encampment that called for "Death to Israeli Real Estate" and "Death to America."

Mamdani, who takes office on Jan. 1, has previously and repeatedly emphasized that he stands against antisemitism. 

The ADL noted that many appointees did not raise concerns and emphasized that at least 25 individuals expressed support for the Jewish community, including Rabbi Joe Potasnik, Félix Matos Rodríguez, Wayne Ho, John King, and Jerry Goldfeder. However, the organization said it remains concerned about Mamdani’s team overall.

"Many of Mayor-elect Mamdani's Transition Committee appointments are inconsistent with his campaign commitments to prioritize the safety of New York's Jewish community," the ADL wrote in the report.

Fox News Digital reached out to Mamdani for more comment.

More than 125 congressional Democrats are pushing the Trump administration to withdraw a proposed rule that would open the door to denying a person a green card if they use public assistance, including Medicaid or food stamps.

"This proposal punishes families for caring for their children. It would scare parents away from health care, food assistance, and early education that U.S. citizen children are legally entitled to, putting kids at risk and destabilizing entire communities," Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said in a statement to The Hill.

"Congress never intended public charge to be used this way, and we are demanding DHS withdraw this harmful proposal before it inflicts real and lasting damage on American families," Espaillat added.

The Department of Homeland Security's proposal would rescind a rule adopted in 2022 under the Biden administration that reinstated a long-standing but relatively narrow definition of "public charge."

OVERWEIGHT FOREIGNERS SEEKING VISAS MAY BE REJECTED TO SAVE HEALTHCARE COSTS, TAXPAYER EXPENSE

The 2022 rule defined a "public charge" as someone "primarily dependent" on government assistance, particularly people receiving cash assistance for income maintenance or nursing home care at government expense. Most non-cash benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps did not count toward a public charge determination under that rule.

DHS' new proposal argues that the Biden-era policy is a "straitjacket" on immigration officers that prevents them from considering "all factors and information relevant to an alien’s likelihood at any time of becoming a public charge."

Opponents of the Trump administration's proposed rule change fear it would open the door to widespread rejection of green cards for people who would otherwise qualify and that it would lead immigrants to not seek assistance they could qualify for over concerns that it could impact their green card applications.

If the proposal is finalized, the Trump administration would not have a formal definition of what it means to be a public charge. This would give immigration officials broader discretion to consider a wider array of factors and potentially additional types of benefits in determining what constitutes a public charge, moving away from the narrow "primarily dependent" factor that was included in the 2022 rule.

In urging the federal government to abandon the proposal, 127 Democrats said the rule would create "immediate and widespread uncertainty," according to The Hill.

The Democrat lawmakers argue in formal comments that immigration officers would be forced to make a public charge determination with little guidance.

DHS TO IMPOSE $1K FEE FOR MIGRANTS GRANTED HUMANITARIAN PAROLE

"Removing these definitions invites arbitrary decision-making and creates significant risk that adjudicators will rely on factors that Congress has not authorized," the lawmakers wrote to DHS.

"The proposed rule contains no assurance that adjudicators will refrain from considering benefits received during periods when the federal government expressly stated that such benefits had no immigration consequences," they continued.

The lawmakers also said the proposed rule opens the door to penalizing people who previously used assistance programs when there was no risk for accessing the benefits.

"Families seeking adjustment of status — including refugees, survivors of domestic violence or trafficking, children who have been abused, neglected, or abandoned, and others whom Congress has long exempted from punitive public charge treatment — cannot navigate a system where the rules shift without warning and where past, lawful conduct that the federal government had stated was permissible could be reinterpreted as a negative factor," they wrote.

"To be very clear, the proposed rule will trigger a massive chilling effect, driving eligible families away from essential assistance in health care, nutrition, childcare, and education, with the heaviest harm falling on U.S. citizen children," the lawmakers said.

Another group of Democrats also submitted comments taking issue with the plan to change the longstanding definition of a public charge.

"Since the term was first codified as an immigration restriction in 1882, it has been consistently interpreted to mean an individual who is, or is likely to become, primarily dependent on the government for his or her care (i.e., someone who is effectively a ‘charge’ or ward of the state)," Rep. Jaime Raskin, D-Md., and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the top Democrat on their respective chambers' Judiciary committees, said in comments signed by additional lawmakers, according to The Hill.

"Over the years, the method for determining such 'primary dependence' has changed, but the principle itself has remained steadfast," they added.

Under the 2019 public charge rule issued during Trump's first term, immigration officers were instructed to reject applicants who used public programs.