NYC Mayor Ditches Democrats – Announces Re-election Bid As An Independent
Shaking things up…
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced his re-election campaign but with a big caveat: he’s running as an Independent.
Adams told Politico on Monday that he wants to “mount a real independent campaign,” saying that the federal bribery charges, which have been dismissed, “handcuffed him.” The New York City Mayor said he’d be “uninhibited” while campaigning.
“I’m in the race to the end. I’m not running on the Democratic line. It’s just not realistic to turn around my numbers and to run a good campaign (from) where we are right now,” Adams said. “It hurts like hell.”
Adams faces an uphill battle in his re-election campaign. Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced on March 1 that he’d be running for New York City mayor.
U.S. District Judge Dale E. Ho on Wednesday dismissed federal charges against Adams, which alleged he used his position to receive luxury travel and illegal campaign contributions from Turkish foreign nationals.
Adams has maintained his innocence and argued that the case was politically motivated by his criticism of the Biden administration’s immigration policy.
A Quinnipac University survey that was conducted just before and just after Cuomo announced his run for mayor found the former governor enjoying 31% support among New York City Democrats, while Adams garnered 11%.
During the interview, the incumbent New York City Mayor slammed Cuomo for signing bail reform measures into law which he says led to a rise in crime during the coronavirus era.
“Look at bail reform — that’s Andrew,” Adams said. “He can’t say, ‘I’m going to save the city from the far left’ when he surrendered to the far left.”
Adams told the outlet that he would submit the required 3,750 signatures on May 27, which would put him on the ballot for November’s election.
“Now I need this runway until November to redefine and remind people: This is why you elected me in the first place,” Adams said.
















Trump’s Voter Citizenship Requirement Blocked By Federal Judge
In a controversial decision that critics say undermines basic electoral integrity, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction Thursday blocking the Trump administration from implementing key provisions of its election reform order — including a requirement that individuals provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
The Trump administration’s order, signed in March, sought to address the widespread public concern over election security by aligning U.S. registration standards with those used by many developed nations — where proof of citizenship is a basic requirement to cast a vote. Yet, in her ruling, Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Democratic operatives and partisan groups, granting their request to halt implementation of what should be a commonsense safeguard.
It’s already a felony for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. So why oppose a mechanism to verify that voters are, in fact, eligible citizens? The administration’s proposed policy simply sought to enforce existing law, not change it. But for activists and partisan lawyers, that’s apparently too much.
Critics of the ruling argue that it demonstrates a disturbing disconnect between legal theory and electoral reality. While the plaintiffs claimed the executive order infringes on the “Elections Clause” of the Constitution — which delegates much of the authority over elections to the states — the Trump order targeted the federal voter registration form, which is a product of federal law and administered by a federal agency.
Among the more absurd arguments presented during the case was the suggestion that requiring proof of citizenship would complicate voter registration drives at grocery stores and public venues. In other words, ensuring that only citizens vote is too inconvenient for activists looking to register voters en masse.
But this framing reveals the central issue: voter registration is being treated like a political campaign tactic, not a civic responsibility. If accuracy and integrity are seen as barriers to convenience, something is deeply wrong with the system.
If the courts won’t even allow the federal form to be updated to reflect current law, critics argue, how can Americans have confidence that elections are fair and secure?
Ironically, while liberal groups celebrate the decision as a “victory for voters,” many Americans see it as a victory for loopholes and ambiguity. The same people who insist elections are sacred and democracy is under threat are now openly opposing the most basic eligibility checks used around the world.
Meanwhile, Trump’s other proposed reforms — including tighter mail ballot deadlines and review of voter rolls against immigration databases — were allowed to stand. But with the citizenship requirement blocked, many worry that the core vulnerability in the system remains unaddressed.
When noncitizens can easily register to vote — intentionally or accidentally — and the federal government is barred from checking, who exactly benefits?
This article originally appeared on American Liberty News. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It is republished with permission.
READ NEXT: President Trump Signs Executive Order Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Vote In Federal Elections